Am 11.09.2015 um 12:13 schrieb Michael Tokarev: > 07.09.2015 18:46, Andreas Färber wrote: >> Am 04.09.2015 um 23:01 schrieb marcandre.lur...@redhat.com: >>> From: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lur...@redhat.com> >>> >>> It looks like this documentation is obsolete: a child object may lookup >>> its parent stored in the Object struct. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lur...@redhat.com> >>> --- >>> include/qom/object.h | 3 --- >>> 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-) >> >> Either once again you are trying to do stuff behind my back, or your >> setup is really broken: I double-checked that include/qom/ is listed in >> MAINTAINERS, so I should've been CC'ed rather than just -trivial. >> >> It's been a valid rule not to mess with these internal fields, therefore >> this is not trivial at all, and that's one reason why my x86 CPU series >> using it was an RFC. We should either come up with a proper wrapper >> function object_get_parent(), or with a wrapper function adding a link<> >> property (where we would need to be careful with ref counts) - long time >> only the composition tree needed to mess with an object's parent. >> >> If you have a concrete use case of parent access, please point to it. > > So, should the current documentation remain, or should the patch be > applied? If the latter, Andreas, please take care of it.
This patch should not be applied, NACK. I outlined ideas for a v2 series above though. Thanks, Andreas > > Thanks, > > /mjt > -- SUSE Linux GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton; HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
