There are no remaining users in the tree, so let's remove it.
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org>
Cc: Eduardo Habkost <eduardo@habkost.net>
Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Cc: Marcel Apfelbaum <marcel.apfelbaum@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
---
hw/i386/pc.c | 19 -------------------
include/hw/i386/pc.h | 1 -
2 files changed, 20 deletions(-)
diff --git a/hw/i386/pc.c b/hw/i386/pc.c
index 920aa32b53..c4789e2f35 100644
--- a/hw/i386/pc.c
+++ b/hw/i386/pc.c
@@ -1646,21 +1646,6 @@ static HotplugHandler *pc_get_hotplug_handler(MachineState *machine,
return NULL;
}
-static void
-pc_machine_get_device_memory_region_size(Object *obj, Visitor *v,
- const char *name, void *opaque,
- Error **errp)
-{
- MachineState *ms = MACHINE(obj);
- int64_t value = 0;
-
- if (ms->device_memory) {
- value = memory_region_size(&ms->device_memory->mr);
- }
-
- visit_type_int(v, name, &value, errp);
-}
-
static void pc_machine_get_vmport(Object *obj, Visitor *v, const char *name,
void *opaque, Error **errp)
{
@@ -1980,10 +1965,6 @@ static void pc_machine_class_init(ObjectClass *oc, void *data)
object_class_property_set_description(oc, PC_MACHINE_MAX_RAM_BELOW_4G,
"Maximum ram below the 4G boundary (32bit boundary)");
- object_class_property_add(oc, PC_MACHINE_DEVMEM_REGION_SIZE, "int",
- pc_machine_get_device_memory_region_size, NULL,
- NULL, NULL);
-
object_class_property_add(oc, PC_MACHINE_VMPORT, "OnOffAuto",
pc_machine_get_vmport, pc_machine_set_vmport,
NULL, NULL);
diff --git a/include/hw/i386/pc.h b/include/hw/i386/pc.h
index c661e9cc80..6c9ad2d132 100644
--- a/include/hw/i386/pc.h
+++ b/include/hw/i386/pc.h
@@ -60,7 +60,6 @@ typedef struct PCMachineState {
#define PC_MACHINE_ACPI_DEVICE_PROP "acpi-device"
#define PC_MACHINE_MAX_RAM_BELOW_4G "max-ram-below-4g"
-#define PC_MACHINE_DEVMEM_REGION_SIZE "device-memory-region-size"
#define PC_MACHINE_VMPORT "vmport"
#define PC_MACHINE_SMBUS "smbus"
#define PC_MACHINE_SATA "sata"
--
2.40.1On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 01:38:36PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> There are no remaining users in the tree, so let's remove it.
>
> Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
> Cc: Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org>
> Cc: Eduardo Habkost <eduardo@habkost.net>
> Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
> Cc: Marcel Apfelbaum <marcel.apfelbaum@gmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
This (with previous patches) means any user changing
device-memory-region-size machine property is now broken, right?
How do we know there are no users?
> ---
> hw/i386/pc.c | 19 -------------------
> include/hw/i386/pc.h | 1 -
> 2 files changed, 20 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/hw/i386/pc.c b/hw/i386/pc.c
> index 920aa32b53..c4789e2f35 100644
> --- a/hw/i386/pc.c
> +++ b/hw/i386/pc.c
> @@ -1646,21 +1646,6 @@ static HotplugHandler *pc_get_hotplug_handler(MachineState *machine,
> return NULL;
> }
>
> -static void
> -pc_machine_get_device_memory_region_size(Object *obj, Visitor *v,
> - const char *name, void *opaque,
> - Error **errp)
> -{
> - MachineState *ms = MACHINE(obj);
> - int64_t value = 0;
> -
> - if (ms->device_memory) {
> - value = memory_region_size(&ms->device_memory->mr);
> - }
> -
> - visit_type_int(v, name, &value, errp);
> -}
> -
> static void pc_machine_get_vmport(Object *obj, Visitor *v, const char *name,
> void *opaque, Error **errp)
> {
> @@ -1980,10 +1965,6 @@ static void pc_machine_class_init(ObjectClass *oc, void *data)
> object_class_property_set_description(oc, PC_MACHINE_MAX_RAM_BELOW_4G,
> "Maximum ram below the 4G boundary (32bit boundary)");
>
> - object_class_property_add(oc, PC_MACHINE_DEVMEM_REGION_SIZE, "int",
> - pc_machine_get_device_memory_region_size, NULL,
> - NULL, NULL);
> -
> object_class_property_add(oc, PC_MACHINE_VMPORT, "OnOffAuto",
> pc_machine_get_vmport, pc_machine_set_vmport,
> NULL, NULL);
> diff --git a/include/hw/i386/pc.h b/include/hw/i386/pc.h
> index c661e9cc80..6c9ad2d132 100644
> --- a/include/hw/i386/pc.h
> +++ b/include/hw/i386/pc.h
> @@ -60,7 +60,6 @@ typedef struct PCMachineState {
>
> #define PC_MACHINE_ACPI_DEVICE_PROP "acpi-device"
> #define PC_MACHINE_MAX_RAM_BELOW_4G "max-ram-below-4g"
> -#define PC_MACHINE_DEVMEM_REGION_SIZE "device-memory-region-size"
> #define PC_MACHINE_VMPORT "vmport"
> #define PC_MACHINE_SMBUS "smbus"
> #define PC_MACHINE_SATA "sata"
> --
> 2.40.1
On 30.05.23 15:07, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 01:38:36PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote: >> There are no remaining users in the tree, so let's remove it. >> >> Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> >> Cc: Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org> >> Cc: Eduardo Habkost <eduardo@habkost.net> >> Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> >> Cc: Marcel Apfelbaum <marcel.apfelbaum@gmail.com> >> Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> > > > This (with previous patches) means any user changing > device-memory-region-size machine property is now broken, right? We only had a getter, no setter (for good reason). > How do we know there are no users? We don't. A quick google search makes "device-memory-region-size" and "qom-get" only pop up in BUG fixes for something that appears to be QEMU developer driven. I don't consider it any useful, but if we want to be careful, sure we can leave it around. -- Thanks, David / dhildenb
On 30/5/23 15:11, David Hildenbrand wrote: > On 30.05.23 15:07, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >> On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 01:38:36PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote: >>> There are no remaining users in the tree, so let's remove it. >>> >>> Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> >>> Cc: Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org> >>> Cc: Eduardo Habkost <eduardo@habkost.net> >>> Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> >>> Cc: Marcel Apfelbaum <marcel.apfelbaum@gmail.com> >>> Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> >> >> >> This (with previous patches) means any user changing >> device-memory-region-size machine property is now broken, right? > > We only had a getter, no setter (for good reason). > >> How do we know there are no users? > > We don't. A quick google search makes "device-memory-region-size" and > "qom-get" only pop up in BUG fixes for something that appears to be QEMU > developer driven. This was my analysis. > I don't consider it any useful, but if we want to be careful, sure we > can leave it around. If we want to keep it, we should move it to generic code IMHO, not PC machine. Otherwise the less unused code the better :)
On 30.05.23 15:11, David Hildenbrand wrote: > On 30.05.23 15:07, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >> On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 01:38:36PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote: >>> There are no remaining users in the tree, so let's remove it. >>> >>> Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> >>> Cc: Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org> >>> Cc: Eduardo Habkost <eduardo@habkost.net> >>> Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> >>> Cc: Marcel Apfelbaum <marcel.apfelbaum@gmail.com> >>> Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> >> >> >> This (with previous patches) means any user changing >> device-memory-region-size machine property is now broken, right? > > We only had a getter, no setter (for good reason). > >> How do we know there are no users? > > We don't. A quick google search makes "device-memory-region-size" and > "qom-get" only pop up in BUG fixes for something that appears to be QEMU > developer driven. > > I don't consider it any useful, but if we want to be careful, sure we > can leave it around. Looking further, libvirt doesn't use it (and never used it). I already renamed it in 2018 without anybody complaining: https://www.mail-archive.com/qemu-devel@nongnu.org/msg532101.html So I'm quite confident that nobody will really miss this property. -- Thanks, David / dhildenb
On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 03:41:58PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote: > On 30.05.23 15:11, David Hildenbrand wrote: > > On 30.05.23 15:07, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 01:38:36PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote: > > > > There are no remaining users in the tree, so let's remove it. > > > > > > > > Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> > > > > Cc: Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org> > > > > Cc: Eduardo Habkost <eduardo@habkost.net> > > > > Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> > > > > Cc: Marcel Apfelbaum <marcel.apfelbaum@gmail.com> > > > > Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> > > > > > > > > > This (with previous patches) means any user changing > > > device-memory-region-size machine property is now broken, right? > > > > We only had a getter, no setter (for good reason). > > > > > How do we know there are no users? > > > > We don't. A quick google search makes "device-memory-region-size" and > > "qom-get" only pop up in BUG fixes for something that appears to be QEMU > > developer driven. > > > > I don't consider it any useful, but if we want to be careful, sure we > > can leave it around. > > Looking further, libvirt doesn't use it (and never used it). > > I already renamed it in 2018 without anybody complaining: > > https://www.mail-archive.com/qemu-devel@nongnu.org/msg532101.html > > So I'm quite confident that nobody will really miss this property. > > -- > Thanks, > > David / dhildenb OK. In the future we need to be careful and use "x-" prefix for what we don't want to expose. -- MST
On 30/5/23 13:38, David Hildenbrand wrote: > There are no remaining users in the tree, so let's remove it. > > Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> > Cc: Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org> > Cc: Eduardo Habkost <eduardo@habkost.net> > Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> > Cc: Marcel Apfelbaum <marcel.apfelbaum@gmail.com> > Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> > --- > hw/i386/pc.c | 19 ------------------- > include/hw/i386/pc.h | 1 - > 2 files changed, 20 deletions(-) Reviewed-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@linaro.org>
© 2016 - 2024 Red Hat, Inc.