Andreas Färber <afaer...@suse.de> wrote:
> Am 04.05.2012 12:54, schrieb Juan Quintela:
>> Some cpu's definitions define CPU_SAVE_VERSION, others not, but they have
>
> "CPUs' definitions"?
>
>> defined cpu_save/load.
>
> This commit message sounds wrong. Use of cpu_save/load is still coupled
> to CPU_SAVE_VERSION AFAICS.
>
> What really changes is that vmstate_cpu_common is now registered whether
> or not the target supports loading/saving the target-specific parts,
> isn't it? Is that really useful? Either way, the commit message should
> be updated.
For the cpus that weren't using CPU_SAVE_VERSION, we now register the
system as unmigratable, so this don't matter. For the cpus that support
migration, it was always sent. Code now is trivial to understand:
#if !defined(CONFIG_USER_ONLY)
vmstate_register(NULL, cpu_index, &vmstate_cpu_common, env);
vmstate_register(NULL, cpu_index, &vmstate_cpu, env);
#endif
Befor it was a maze of ifdefs. No change of behaviour with what we had
before. For either cpus that had[not] support for migration or not.
