From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=33669 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PuPpD-0000j2-Dd for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 08:41:30 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PuPou-0002pl-2R for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 08:40:57 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:1026) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PuPot-0002pN-J2 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 08:40:55 -0500 From: Juan Quintela In-Reply-To: <1298982742-31154-2-git-send-email-peter.maydell@linaro.org> (Peter Maydell's message of "Tue, 1 Mar 2011 12:32:21 +0000") References: <1298982742-31154-1-git-send-email-peter.maydell@linaro.org> <1298982742-31154-2-git-send-email-peter.maydell@linaro.org> Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 14:39:19 +0100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 1/2] hw/arm_sysctl.c: Add the Versatile Express system registers Reply-To: quintela@redhat.com List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Peter Maydell Cc: patches@linaro.org, Dawid@gnu.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Amit Mahajan , =?utf-8?Q?Ci=C4=99=C5=BCarkiewicz?= , Bahadir Balban Peter Maydell wrote: Hi > @@ -41,6 +44,9 @@ static const VMStateDescription vmstate_arm_sysctl = { > VMSTATE_UINT32(flags, arm_sysctl_state), > VMSTATE_UINT32(nvflags, arm_sysctl_state), > VMSTATE_UINT32(resetlevel, arm_sysctl_state), > + VMSTATE_UINT32(sys_cfgdata, arm_sysctl_state), > + VMSTATE_UINT32(sys_cfgctrl, arm_sysctl_state), > + VMSTATE_UINT32(sys_cfgstat, arm_sysctl_state), > VMSTATE_END_OF_LIST() > } > }; Three options (about migration): - left things as they are and become incompatible without changing versions - if you don't care about backward compatibility, just add +1 to all the version fields and you are done. - add this fields only for the new version. IMHO 1st one is the worse option. I will go with the middle one (as far as I know, nobody on arm uses interversion migration (as far as I know, nobody uses migration at all). If you (or anybody else does), a pointer to one setup that is known to work is welcome. Later, Juan.