Le 14/01/2021 à 16:49, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé a écrit : > On 7/9/20 9:19 PM, Peter Maydell wrote: >> On Fri, 3 Jul 2020 at 21:19, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4...@amsat.org> wrote: >>> >>> This is a proof-of-concept after chatting with Peter Maydell >>> on IRC earlier. >>> >>> Introduce the vmstate_no_state_to_migrate structure, and >>> a reference to it: vmstate_qdev_no_state_to_migrate. >>> Use this reference in devices with no fields to migrate. >>> >>> This is useful to catch devices missing vmstate, such: >>> - ads7846 >>> - mcf-uart >>> - mcf-fec >>> - versatile_i2c >>> - ... >>> >>> I am not sure about: >>> - gpex-pcihost >> >> I think it's correct that this has no internal state: >> the only interesting state is in the GPEXRootState, which >> is a TYPE_GPEX_ROOT_DEVICE which migrates itself. >> >> I made some comments on the "meaty" bits of the patchset, >> and reviewed one or two of the "mark this device as >> having no migration state" patches, but it doesn't seem >> worth reviewing all of them until the migration submaintainers >> have a chance to weigh in on whether they like the concept >> (I expect they're busy right now with freeze-related stuff :-)) > > Now that we are far from freeze-date is a good time to ping > again on this concept :) > > Most of the devices are ARM except: > - cpu-cluster (Eduardo/Marcel) > - hcd-ohci (Gerd) > - mac-nubus-bridge (Laurent) > - generic QOM (Daniel, Paolo) > > Is someone against this proposal?
I'm not against the proposal, but I don't understand why we need this. Thanks, Laurent
