From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:51430) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z5GHz-00048v-7x for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 17 Jun 2015 12:34:17 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z5GHu-0004dQ-5B for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 17 Jun 2015 12:34:11 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:38576) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z5GHt-0004bc-Vo for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 17 Jun 2015 12:34:06 -0400 Received: from int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.24]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 24C4733E61A for ; Wed, 17 Jun 2015 16:34:05 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2015 18:34:01 +0200 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Message-ID: <20150617183046-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> References: <20150617121148-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> <55815B06.5030508@redhat.com> <20150617133816-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> <55815FA7.3070205@redhat.com> <20150617135340-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> <55816039.3080103@redhat.com> <20150617135716-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> <5581660E.2090807@redhat.com> <20150617164437-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> <55819D53.2090508@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <55819D53.2090508@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Migration compatibility for serial List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Paolo Bonzini Cc: amit.shah@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, "Dr. David Alan Gilbert (git)" , quintela@redhat.com On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 06:16:19PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > On 17/06/2015 16:50, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > > I just tried, set prog_if to different values, sure it failed. > > > > > > How so? It's just a byte in config space. Why does it fail? Because pci core migrates it and validates it on both sides. > > > But even then, fixing > > > migration is just a side effect of keeping config space consistent for a > > > given machine type (i.e. not changing hardware type under the guest's feet). > > > > David's patches are also guest visible, are they not? > > We are losing state guest can indirectly observe, right? > > One case only happens during migration, the other does not. > > Paolo True - apparently the bug was only in the migration stream, not the functionality? -- MST