From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:47282)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <quintela@redhat.com>) id 1ZADi3-0005vo-Vh
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 01 Jul 2015 04:49:37 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <quintela@redhat.com>) id 1ZADi0-0006MH-De
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 01 Jul 2015 04:49:35 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:57887)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <quintela@redhat.com>) id 1ZADi0-0006M1-7j
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 01 Jul 2015 04:49:32 -0400
From: Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <1434043048-4444-8-git-send-email-dgilbert@redhat.com> (David
	Alan Gilbert's message of "Thu, 11 Jun 2015 18:17:23 +0100")
References: <1434043048-4444-1-git-send-email-dgilbert@redhat.com>
	<1434043048-4444-8-git-send-email-dgilbert@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 01 Jul 2015 10:49:30 +0200
Message-ID: <87vbe41cv9.fsf@neno.neno>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 07/12] Rework ram_control_load_hook to
	hook during block load
Reply-To: quintela@redhat.com
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert (git)" <dgilbert@redhat.com>
Cc: amit.shah@redhat.com, arei.gonglei@huawei.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, mrhines@us.ibm.com

"Dr. David Alan Gilbert (git)" <dgilbert@redhat.com> wrote:
> From: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@redhat.com>
>
> We need the names of RAMBlocks as they're loaded for RDMA,
> reuse a slightly modified ram_control_load_hook:
>   a) Pass a 'data' parameter to use for the name in the block-reg
>      case
>   b) Only some hook types now require the presence of a hook function.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dr. David Alan Gilbert <dgilbert@redhat.com>

> @@ -1569,6 +1569,8 @@ static int ram_load(QEMUFile *f, void *opaque, int version_id)
>                                  error_report_err(local_err);
>                              }
>                          }
> +                        ram_control_load_hook(f, RAM_CONTROL_BLOCK_REG,
> +                                              block->idstr);
>                          break;
>                      }
>                  }
> @@ -1637,7 +1639,7 @@ static int ram_load(QEMUFile *f, void *opaque, int version_id)
>              break;
>          default:
>              if (flags & RAM_SAVE_FLAG_HOOK) {
> -                ram_control_load_hook(f, flags);
> +                ram_control_load_hook(f, RAM_CONTROL_HOOK, NULL);

Using a function in only two places, and passing two additional
parameters for that ....

> +static int rdma_load_hook(QEMUFile *f, void *opaque, uint64_t flags, void *data)
> +{
> +    switch (flags) {
> +    case RAM_CONTROL_BLOCK_REG:
> +        /* TODO A later patch */
> +        return 0;
> +        break;
> +
> +    case RAM_CONTROL_HOOK:
> +        return qemu_rdma_registration_handle(f, opaque);
> +
> +    default:
> +        /* Shouldn't be called with any other values */
> +        abort();
> +    }

And you are doing two completely different things depending of the flag ....

Later, Juan.