On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 12:07:27PM +0400, Marc-André Lureau wrote:
> Hi
>
> On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 11:50 PM Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Some chardev QOM cleanup patches had to be dropped from my queue
> > due to build erros introduced by code movements across ifdef
> > boundaries at char-parallel.c. This series redo the changes from
> > those patches, but the macro renames are now a little different:
> >
> > In this version I have decided to rename the type checking macros
> > from *_CHARDEV to CHARDEV_* instead of renaming tye
> > TYPE_CHARDEV_* constants to TYPE_*_CHARDEV, to make the
> > identifiers actually match the QOM type name strings
> > ("chardev-*").
> >
>
> Sounds reasonable to me, but it loses the matching with the
> structure/object type name though.
>
> - MuxChardev *d = MUX_CHARDEV(s);
> + MuxChardev *d = CHARDEV_MUX(s);
>
> I have a preference for the first. Unless we rename all the chardev types
> too...
I tend to think the structs should be renamed too - I've always considerd
them to be backwards.
> Imho, the QOM type name is mostly an internal detail, the C type name is
> dominant in the code.
Err it is the reverse. The QOM type name is exposed public API via QOM
commands, while the C struct names are a internal private detail.
Yes, but without the chardev- prefix (unless you try object-add which I don't think will work with chardev)