From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=54711 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PSweu-0000H9-9T for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 15 Dec 2010 14:05:05 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PSwes-0003Th-HN for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 15 Dec 2010 14:05:04 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:48681) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PSwes-0003SO-AQ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 15 Dec 2010 14:05:02 -0500 Received: from int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.25]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id oBFJ4xde027703 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Wed, 15 Dec 2010 14:05:00 -0500 Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 21:04:36 +0200 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Message-ID: <20101215190436.GA8605@redhat.com> References: <1292266756.2857.122.camel@x201> <20101213190619.GD9554@redhat.com> <1292267708.2857.123.camel@x201> <20101214044342.GE9554@redhat.com> <1292302848.2857.148.camel@x201> <20101214123209.GC19950@redhat.com> <1292341315.2857.175.camel@x201> <4D07947B.80702@redhat.com> <20101215100024.GC28825@redhat.com> <4D08F6F9.5050104@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4D08F6F9.5050104@redhat.com> Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH] rtl8139: IO memory is not part of vmstate List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Paolo Bonzini Cc: Alex Williamson , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, quintela@redhat.com On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 06:12:25PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 12/15/2010 11:00 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > >>Indeed, subsections are for data that is rarely needed so that > >>there's some chance (sometimes ~100%) of migration working > >>seemlessly. > > > >If a subsection arrives that qemu does > >not know about, won't migratin fail? > > Yes, that's why rarely needed => some high chance of migration > working (though no certainty). > > >>In this case it's either > >>no-bump-and-live-with-the-consequences, or changing the version id. > > > >This was discussed to death already. version ids have the problem > >that they don't play nicely with downstreams. > > Downstream version bumps don't play nicely with upstream, so > downstream does have a reason for always-necessary subsections. But > upstream can bump the version id as much as they care. > > Paolo This assuming upstream developers do not care about downstreams. To give a chance for downstream to cherry-pick changes, upstream should use subsections instead of version ids too. -- MST