From: Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <4A8E6049.6020609@redhat.com> (Gerd Hoffmann's message of "Fri,
	21 Aug 2009 10:52:25 +0200")
References: <cover.1250788880.git.quintela@redhat.com>
	<20ca5615c8cdc456296698133e3b0dbd5a1f4de7.1250788880.git.quintela@redhat.com>
	<4A8E6049.6020609@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 11:01:34 +0200
Message-ID: <m33a7ly1zl.fsf@neno.mitica>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 21/23] Port PCIDevice state to VMState
To: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 08/20/09 19:42, Juan Quintela wrote:
>> This uses a variant of buffer, with extra checks. Also uses the new
>> support for cheking that a read value is less or equal than a field.
>
> Hmm, why you are hopping through all these loops?
>
> I'd just keep the existing pci_device_{save,load} functions.  load
> anyway for backward compatibility.  save also for devices not yet
> converted to vmstate.  I think alot of the complex stuff you are
> building up here isn't needed then, unless I missed something ...

In this specific case, I think that sending:
size + number of things

it is safe.  I agree that the INT32_EQUAL is a bad idea. But that is how
the current code is done.

> Beside that we'll have to think about how to handle versioning of
> structs.  Do we want vmstate_pci_device (and all others) have its own
> version?  Probably makes sense.  Handling this should go into the
> generic code then and not be hacked into each structure using
> VMSTATE_INT32_LE().

Proper solution here is to use subsections.
Each time that you call VMSTATE_PCI_DEVICE() it sends a subsection
there.  Then we get the versioning by free.  This is how I am thinking
it is the right way to do it.

virtio stuff: the more than I think about it, the easier way is to just
get rid of the whole mess and do something that is sensible.

Later, Juan.

> cheers,
>   Gerd