From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:58642)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <dgilbert@redhat.com>) id 1WhkZP-0002Yf-MD
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 06 May 2014 14:58:33 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <dgilbert@redhat.com>) id 1WhkZH-0002Iz-Te
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 06 May 2014 14:58:27 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:19614)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <dgilbert@redhat.com>) id 1WhkZH-0002If-My
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 06 May 2014 14:58:19 -0400
Date: Tue, 6 May 2014 19:58:07 +0100
From: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <20140506185807.GB8277@work-vm>
References: <1398271069-22057-1-git-send-email-dgilbert@redhat.com>
	<5357EF56.4010703@redhat.com> <20140423171622.GG2516@work-vm>
	<87sip3dvsj.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org>
	<20140424082059.GB2459@work-vm> <20140424082923.GA31845@redhat.com>
	<87wqeduc0d.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <87wqeduc0d.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH v2 00/16] visitor+BER migration format
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: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
Cc: stefanb@linux.vnet.ibm.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, quintela@redhat.com, mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com, agraf@suse.de, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>, aliguori@amazon.com, afaerber@suse.de

* Markus Armbruster (armbru@redhat.com) wrote:
> "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> writes:

<snip>

> > OK but for a new machine type, let's default to BER, right?
> > I see no reason to keep supporting when non-BER when -M specifies 2.1
> > compatibility, do you?
> 
> I fail to see the relation between machine type and migration's wire
> encoding.

New machine types are a useful but not definitive line in the sand.  If
you enable something/change the default on a new machine type you know
it won't break any existing users since there aren't any.

Dve
--
Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilbert@redhat.com / Manchester, UK