From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:36448) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Y0lId-0000d3-Ud for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 01:08:06 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Y0lIX-00083g-Pl for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 01:07:59 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:51712) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Y0lIX-00083O-IQ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 01:07:53 -0500 Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:37:23 +0530 From: Amit Shah Message-ID: <20141216060723.GC19675@grmbl.mre> References: <1418361995-24091-1-git-send-email-david@gibson.dropbear.id.au> <20141216041330.GA19675@grmbl.mre> <20141216043354.GK23547@voom.fritz.box> <20141216043849.GB19675@grmbl.mre> <20141216053815.GL23547@voom.fritz.box> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20141216053815.GL23547@voom.fritz.box> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCHv2] Fix virtio-serial migration on bi-endian targets List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: David Gibson Cc: mst@redhat.com, aik@ozlabs.ru, rusty@rustcorp.com.au, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, agraf@suse.de, borntraeger@de.ibm.com, mdroth@us.ibm.com On (Tue) 16 Dec 2014 [16:38:15], David Gibson wrote: > On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 10:08:49AM +0530, Amit Shah wrote: > > On (Tue) 16 Dec 2014 [15:33:54], David Gibson wrote: > > > On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 09:43:30AM +0530, Amit Shah wrote: > > > > Can you split this patch so the config change and the max_nr_ports > > > > change are separate? The max_nr_ports could similarly be ignored by > > > > dest, right? > > > > > > Um.. I'm not exactly sure where you're drawing the distinction between > > > the two parts. Are you thinking > > > patch 1) make config.max_nr_ports unused, by using > > > max_virtserial_ports instead > > > patch 2) eliminate the config field entirely > > > > For this patch, I'm just suggesting to only touch cols and rows, and > > lines that touch the max_nr_ports can be put in 2/2. Eliminating > > config entirely may not be desirable, but if you want to do that, and > > mark all fields as 'unused' in the savevm/loadvm functions, go for > > it :-) > > That division really doesn't make sense to me. If rows and cols are > removed, but max_nr_ports stays, then get_config has to become a > weird hybrid where it copies some stuff directly from ->config and > other bits from elsewhere. > > I really don't see any reason keeping config would be a desirable > thing: it's a cache of information that doesn't need to be cached, and > just adds complexity because of the endian issues. Oh please go ahead and do it -- my only point here is to split the patchset into logical units, not wrt the total intent of the series. Amit