On 11/01/2016 04:02 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>
> On 31/10/2016 14:10, Halil Pasic wrote:
>> I think this got overly complicated.
>
> I agree. :)
>
>> Here is a little patch on
>> top of your stuff which gets rid of 15 lines and IMHO simplifies
>> things quite a bit. What do you think?
>>
On 31/10/2016 14:10, Halil Pasic wrote:
> I think this got overly complicated.
I agree. :)
> Here is a little patch on
> top of your stuff which gets rid of 15 lines and IMHO simplifies
> things quite a bit. What do you think?
>
> It is based on/inspired by Dave's proposal with the dummy stu
On 10/28/2016 09:46 PM, Jianjun Duan wrote:
>
>
> On 10/28/2016 12:06 PM, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
>> * Jianjun Duan (du...@linux.vnet.ibm.com) wrote:
>>> Currently we cannot directly transfer a QTAILQ instance because of the
>>> limitation in the migration code. Here we introduce an appro
On 10/28/2016 12:06 PM, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> * Jianjun Duan (du...@linux.vnet.ibm.com) wrote:
>> Currently we cannot directly transfer a QTAILQ instance because of the
>> limitation in the migration code. Here we introduce an approach to
>> transfer such structures. We created VMStateI
* Jianjun Duan (du...@linux.vnet.ibm.com) wrote:
> Currently we cannot directly transfer a QTAILQ instance because of the
> limitation in the migration code. Here we introduce an approach to
> transfer such structures. We created VMStateInfo vmstate_info_qtailq
> for QTAILQ. Similar VMStateInfo can
Currently we cannot directly transfer a QTAILQ instance because of the
limitation in the migration code. Here we introduce an approach to
transfer such structures. We created VMStateInfo vmstate_info_qtailq
for QTAILQ. Similar VMStateInfo can be created for other data structures
such as list.
This
