On Wed, 2016-04-13 at 16:37 +0200, Martin Kletzander wrote:
v2:
- Just a rebase
- I did *not* use virPCIDeviceAddress wording instead as discussed in
the v1 thread. That's because we have lot of functions working
with virDevicePCIAddress named exactly after that and renaming
those would be ugly IMHO.
Sorry, but I feel pretty strongly the other way around: if
it's defined in virpci.h, it should be called virPCI*.
virDevicePCIAddress is used a lot but AFAICT the number of
functions whose name is derived from it is just six.
Moreover, we don't have other virDevice*Address types (or
even just virDevice*) to set a precedent, but we have a
bunch of virPCI* stuff including virPCIDevice, which happens
to have a virPCIDeviceAddress among its members.
Bikeshedding, I know, but there you have it :)
I'll look at the actual code changes tomorrow.
Cheers.
--
Andrea Bolognani
Software Engineer - Virtualization Team