Re: [PATCH v2 9/9] docs/migration: reflect the changes about needed subsections

[Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>]

marcandre.lureau@redhat.com wrote:
> From: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lureau@redhat.com>
>
> Signed-off-by: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lureau@redhat.com>
> ---
>  docs/devel/migration.rst | 17 ++++++++---------
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/docs/devel/migration.rst b/docs/devel/migration.rst
> index c3e1400c0c..50f313f178 100644
> --- a/docs/devel/migration.rst
> +++ b/docs/devel/migration.rst
> @@ -240,17 +240,16 @@ a newer form of device, or adding that state that you previously
>  forgot to migrate.  This is best solved using a subsection.
>  
>  A subsection is "like" a device vmstate, but with a particularity, it
> -has a Boolean function that tells if that values are needed to be sent
> -or not.  If this functions returns false, the subsection is not sent.
> -Subsections have a unique name, that is looked for on the receiving
> -side.
> +has a Boolean function that tells if that values are needed or not. If
> +this functions returns false, the subsection is not sent. Subsections
> +have a unique name, that is looked for on the receiving side.
>  
>  On the receiving side, if we found a subsection for a device that we
> -don't understand, we just fail the migration.  If we understand all
> -the subsections, then we load the state with success.  There's no check
> -that a subsection is loaded, so a newer QEMU that knows about a subsection
> -can (with care) load a stream from an older QEMU that didn't send
> -the subsection.
> +don't understand, we just fail the migration. If we understand all the
> +subsections, then we load the state with success. There's no check
> +that an optional subsection is loaded, so a newer QEMU that knows
> +about a subsection can (with care) load a stream from an older QEMU
> +that didn't send the subsection.

Reviewed-by: Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>

Just wondering.  What device propmted you to write this series?

Later, Juan.