From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:57653)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <kwolf@redhat.com>) id 1QUfqV-0004zi-0I
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 09 Jun 2011 10:04:31 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <kwolf@redhat.com>) id 1QUfqT-0003JG-Hh
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 09 Jun 2011 10:04:26 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:33305)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <kwolf@redhat.com>) id 1QUfqT-0003JC-6C
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 09 Jun 2011 10:04:25 -0400
Message-ID: <4DF0D392.30203@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2011 16:07:14 +0200
From: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1307625358-20040-1-git-send-email-kwolf@redhat.com>
	<1307625358-20040-2-git-send-email-kwolf@redhat.com>
	<4DF0CA42.1080503@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <4DF0CA42.1080503@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/3] ide: Split error status from status
	register
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: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: stefanha@gmail.com, armbru@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, quintela@redhat.com

Am 09.06.2011 15:27, schrieb Paolo Bonzini:
> On 06/09/2011 03:15 PM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
>> +/* This function accesses bm->bus->error_status which is loaded only after
>> + * BMDMA itself. This is why the function is called from ide_pci_post_load
>> + * instead of being registered with VMState where it would run too early. */
>> +static int ide_bmdma_post_load(void *opaque, int version_id)
>> +{
>> +    BMDMAState *bm = opaque;
>> +    uint8_t abused_bits = BM_MIGRATION_COMPAT_STATUS_BITS;
>> +
>> +    if (bm->status == 0) {
>> +        bm->status = bm->migration_compat_status&  ~abused_bits;
>> +        bm->bus->error_status |= bm->migration_compat_status&  abused_bits;
>> +    }
>> +
>> +    return 0;
>> +}
>> +
> 
> Why the if?

I think you're right. We could enable it unconditionally (and change the
bm->status line from = to |=), but anyway it's redundant if the
subsections are present, so it wouldn't make a difference.

Kevin