From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: VMSTATE_U64 vs. VMSTATE_UINT64
Date: Mon, 09 May 2011 15:04:57 +0200
Message-ID: <m3liyghvnq.fsf@neno.mitica>
References: <4DC19538.8010207@siemens.com>
Reply-To: quintela@redhat.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: Glauber Costa <glommer@redhat.com>, kvm <kvm@vger.kernel.org>
To: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:53620 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1752800Ab1EINF0 (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 9 May 2011 09:05:26 -0400
In-Reply-To: <4DC19538.8010207@siemens.com> (Jan Kiszka's message of "Wed, 04
	May 2011 20:04:40 +0200")
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com> wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> can anyone comment on commit e4d6d49061 ("introduce VMSTATE_U64") in
> qemu-kvm again? I strongly suspect this thing was only introduced to be
> able to grab from a __u64 (for kvmclock) without generating a compiler
> warning that you may got when using uint64_t, right?

Yes, it was that on 64 bit u64 was unsigned long long and uint64_t was
only unsigned long or something like that.  I have forgot if it was
kvmclock or irqchip also.  I think that Marcelo also requested it at
some point, but dont' remember details :-(

Later, Juan.