From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:37009) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Qoxqo-0001VK-ON for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 04 Aug 2011 09:20:39 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Qoxqn-0001hS-6R for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 04 Aug 2011 09:20:38 -0400 Received: from mail-pz0-f42.google.com ([209.85.210.42]:45253) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Qoxqm-0001hC-T6 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 04 Aug 2011 09:20:37 -0400 Received: by pzk37 with SMTP id 37so2407252pzk.29 for ; Thu, 04 Aug 2011 06:20:35 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4E3A9CA0.9090706@codemonkey.ws> Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2011 08:20:32 -0500 From: Anthony Liguori MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1312326516-10117-1-git-send-email-aliguori@us.ibm.com> <4E389258.6040007@us.ibm.com> <4E398A44.8060507@codemonkey.ws> <4E3A48BE.2060302@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <4E3A48BE.2060302@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] migration: remove subsections in fdc and rtl8139 and bump versions List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Paolo Bonzini Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, quintela@redhat.com On 08/04/2011 02:22 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 08/03/2011 11:42 PM, Juan Quintela wrote: >> > I can certainly limit the change to IDE if we think machine, floppy, >> > and rtl8139 are safe. >> >> Ok, only IDE is broken, something done if we are not reverting the >> others. > > Floppy is broken too, and has the problem that the subsection is sent > almost always. On the other hand IDE is only broken if we have > subsections, and that is a rare case. > > So perhaps the best course of action is to only fix floppy, either as in > your patch or by reverting 7d905f71. Let's keep IDE as it is broken as > 0.14 was, and apply my patch to master. Hrm, so the idea is to keep IDE broken but not worry because it is so rare? Why not just force the subsection to be sent? I'm strongly in favor of bumping the version number of any broken device for 0.15, applying Paolo's patches to master, converting to Visitors, and then implementing a new protocol with better (perhaps ASN.1). I think we can do this without touching very much code at all and in such a way that we don't have to worry about major regressions. Regards, Anthony Liguori I'll rebase as soon as there is > agreement this is the way to go. > > Paolo >