From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49387) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cZaal-0000TS-Ak for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 03 Feb 2017 04:55:44 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cZaak-0006SI-H1 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 03 Feb 2017 04:55:43 -0500 Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2017 17:55:29 +0800 From: Peter Xu Message-ID: <20170203095529.GR5151@pxdev.xzpeter.org> References: <1485422381-29019-1-git-send-email-eric.auger@redhat.com> <1485422381-29019-5-git-send-email-eric.auger@redhat.com> <20170126100643.GD2083@work-vm> <9bd0a672-d27c-f232-6ba0-67ad5c1e6f23@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <9bd0a672-d27c-f232-6ba0-67ad5c1e6f23@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC 4/4] hw/intc/arm_gicv3_its: Allow save/restore List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Auger Eric Cc: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" , eric.auger.pro@gmail.com, peter.maydell@linaro.org, qemu-arm@nongnu.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, shannon.zhao@linaro.org, christoffer.dall@linaro.org, drjones@redhat.com, vijay.kilari@gmail.com, Vijaya.Kumar@cavium.com, quintela@redhat.com On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 02:30:17PM +0100, Auger Eric wrote: [...] > >> diff --git a/include/migration/vmstate.h b/include/migration/vmstate.h > >> index 1a22887..ebd755c 100644 > >> --- a/include/migration/vmstate.h > >> +++ b/include/migration/vmstate.h > >> @@ -188,6 +188,8 @@ enum VMStateFlags { > >> > >> typedef enum { > >> MIG_PRI_DEFAULT = 0, > >> + MIG_PRI_GICV3_ITS, > >> + MIG_PRI_GICV3, > >> MIG_PRI_MAX, > > > > Can we keep this commented so it's trivially easy to see the order, something like: > > > > typedef enum { > > MIG_PRI_DEFAULT = 0, > > + MIG_PRI_GICV3_ITS, /* Needs to be before PCI devices */ > > + MIG_PRI_GICV3, /* Must be before ITS */ > Sure > > Thanks! Besides above: is it possible that in the future other platforms (rather than ARM) can leverage these new introduced priority? If so, would it be nicer that we use general names (like, e.g., INTCxxx? or better?) rather than platform-specific names (like, GICxxx)? Thanks, -- peterx