Re: [PATCH 4/4] ppc/pnv: Add xscom- prefix to pervasive-control region name

["Nicholas Piggin" <npiggin@gmail.com>]

On Tue Nov 26, 2024 at 5:28 AM AEST, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 25/11/24 14:20, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> > By convention, xscom regions get a xscom- prefix.
> > 
> > Fixes: 1adf24708bf7 ("hw/ppc: Add pnv nest pervasive common chiplet model")
> > Signed-off-by: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>
> > ---
> >   hw/ppc/pnv_nest_pervasive.c | 2 +-
> >   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/hw/ppc/pnv_nest_pervasive.c b/hw/ppc/pnv_nest_pervasive.c
> > index 77476753a4..780fa69dde 100644
> > --- a/hw/ppc/pnv_nest_pervasive.c
> > +++ b/hw/ppc/pnv_nest_pervasive.c
> > @@ -177,7 +177,7 @@ static void pnv_nest_pervasive_realize(DeviceState *dev, Error **errp)
> >       pnv_xscom_region_init(&nest_pervasive->xscom_ctrl_regs_mr,
> >                             OBJECT(nest_pervasive),
> >                             &pnv_nest_pervasive_control_xscom_ops,
> > -                          nest_pervasive, "pervasive-control",
> > +                          nest_pervasive, "xscom-pervasive-control",
>
> Could this break migration stream? Or only RAM regions need to
> have a stable name? I don't remember, but try be be cautions with
> such cosmetic change just before the release ;)

Hey Phil,

Thanks for always somehow being across everything :)

For the powernv machine we are okay since we don't support migration
at all. It's on the wishlist, but at the moment we have lots of
hardware models that don't provide vmstate. So I think we are okay.

Thanks,
Nick