Re: [PATCH v3 24/24] cpus: Remove CPUClass::has_work() handler

[Philippe Mathieu-Daudé]

On 26/1/25 13:31, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 1/25/25 09:01, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> > diff --git a/cpu-target.c b/cpu-target.c
> > index 98e9e7cc4a1..778f622b07a 100644
> > --- a/cpu-target.c
> > +++ b/cpu-target.c
> > @@ -230,6 +230,14 @@ void cpu_class_init_props(DeviceClass *dc)
> >       device_class_set_props(dc, cpu_common_props);
> >   }
> > +void cpu_exec_class_post_init(CPUClass *cc, void *data)
> > +{
> > +#ifndef CONFIG_USER_ONLY
> > +    /* Check mandatory SysemuCPUOps handlers */
> > +    g_assert(cc->sysemu_ops->has_work);
> > +#endif
> > +}
> > +
>
> Does this really need to be split from...

> diff --git a/hw/core/cpu-common.c b/hw/core/cpu-common.c
>
> > @@ -319,6 +313,11 @@ static void cpu_common_class_init(ObjectClass 
> > *klass, void *data)
> >       dc->user_creatable = false;
> >   }
> > +static void cpu_common_post_class_init(ObjectClass *klass, void *data)
> > +{
> > +    cpu_exec_class_post_init(CPU_CLASS(klass), data);
> > +}
>
> ... here?

cpu-target.c is in specific_ss[], cpu-common.c in common_ss[]
where CONFIG_USER_ONLY is not available thus defined.

We could define cpu_common_post_class_init() in cpu-target.c,
which is odd because not common; or name it differently 
(cpu_exec_post_class_init?) and have it registered as common
post_init handler but again it seems a dirty API mismatch, so
I went this way, hoping that eventually cpu-common.c ends
better abstracted and cpu-target.c disappearing...