Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] qdev: Introduce DEFINE_PROP_RESERVED_REGION

[Markus Armbruster]

Auger Eric <eric.auger@redhat.com> writes:

> Hi Markus,
>
> On 6/22/20 1:22 PM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>> Eric Auger <eric.auger@redhat.com> writes:
>> 
>>> Introduce a new property defining a reserved region:
>>> <low address>, <high address>, <type>.
[...]
>> I dimly remember discussing the wisdom of numeric type here, dig, dig,
>> ..., aha:
>> 
>>     Subject: Re: [PATCH for-5.0 v11 12/20] qapi: Introduce 
>> DEFINE_PROP_INTERVAL
>>     Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2019 11:03:02 +0100
>>     Message-ID: <87y2vg4k6h.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org>
>> 
>>     >> So the "label" part of "<low address>,<high address>,label" is a 
>> number?
>>     > yes it is.
>>     >> 
>>     >> Is a number appropriate for your use case, or would an enum be better?
>>     > I think a number is OK. There might be other types of reserved regions
>>     > in the future. Also if we want to allow somebody else to reuse that
>>     > property in another context, I would rather leave it open?
>> 
>>     I'd prioritize the user interface over possible reuse (which might never
>>     happen).  Mind, I'm not telling you using numbers is a bad user
>>     interface.  In general, enums are nicer, but I don't know enough about
>>     this particular case.
> Yep I remember too ;-) I left as it was because I think this property
> could be used for other use cases.

YAGNI :)

A string would work, too, wouldn't it?

[...]