From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:35350) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SAQV8-0006y9-Ro for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 21 Mar 2012 14:43:16 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SAQV6-0007Ja-FL for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 21 Mar 2012 14:43:14 -0400 Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:45247 helo=mx2.suse.de) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SAQV6-0007JP-6u for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 21 Mar 2012 14:43:12 -0400 Message-ID: <4F6A213E.1030209@suse.de> Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 19:43:10 +0100 From: =?UTF-8?B?QW5kcmVhcyBGw6RyYmVy?= MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <4F6A0C2B.3040300@suse.de> <87r4wleujl.fsf@elfo.elfo> In-Reply-To: <87r4wleujl.fsf@elfo.elfo> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 00/36] VMState port of all cpus List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: quintela@redhat.com Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Am 21.03.2012 18:24, schrieb Juan Quintela: > Andreas F=C3=A4rber wrote: >> Am 19.03.2012 23:57, schrieb Juan Quintela: >>> This repository contains all the changes: >>> >>> git://repo.or.cz/qemu/quintela.git vmstate-cpus-v4 >>> >>> [v4] >>> - rebase to top >>> - adapt to vmstate.h change >>> - adapt to CPUState -> CPU$archState rename >>> - integrate arm changes in the meantime >>> - add QEMU contributors to the copyright notice of ppc & sparc >=20 > [...] >> >> Actually I don't see any CCs at all in this series. Which makes me thi= nk >> this is v1 rubbish in the new cover letter. :/ >=20 > see the changelog for v4. All patches were already reviewed, only There's no tags on the patches though, which equals unreviewed. Especially I see no indication that Alex ack'ed ppc and s390x - do you have links of where he did? > changes were: copyright stuff that Blaw didn't liked (and he was cc'd), > and rebasing (move of stuff from hw/hw.h to vmstate.h and > s/CPUState/CPU$archState/). >=20 > Idea here was not to resend to everybody that already reviewed the > patches another copy. My point was: Please remember to update the cover letter. In this case, if no one is cc'ed, don't write they are (in the part you snipped above) just because they were previously. Has nothing to do with what changes you actually did in v4 and whether they should be cc'ed again (I'd expect to be). >> --cc-cmd=3D"scripts/get_maintainer.pl --nogit-fallback" should work. >=20 > nice trick. sendemail.cccmd (no dash) is even handier long-term. :) >> With regards to the ongoing CPU QOM'ification, if we ever arrive in a >> scenario where we can have multiple targets in one machine, I guess th= e >> VMState .name "cpu" would cause problems? In that case it might be >> better to use the proposed QOM type names, i.e. "arm-cpu", etc. from t= he >> start. >=20 > At least for x86 we need to maintain backward compatibility. For the > cest of architectures, we can change it after this series. It is more, > it would be better to have: "sparc32-cpu" and "sparc64-cpu", so we > could be able to read the vmstate section without more external info. >=20 > I would preffer to do this changes after this series goes in. It's unclear to me where that field is being used - is it being written into the stream and does changing it mean a breakage of the format? Or is this just for debugging? If the former, then I think sparc32-cpu vs. sparc64-cpu is just candy since I don't believe we'll manage to combine 32- and 64-bit CPUs anytime soon. My understanding was that this conversion series would generally preserve the format and allow interoperability where no target-specific changes are performed. Am I wrong if that only applies to x86 now? Andreas --=20 SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 N=C3=BCrnberg, Germany GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imend=C3=B6rffer; HRB 16746 AG N=C3=BC= rnberg