Re: [PATCH 2/9] vfio: Fix compilation errors caused by VFIO migration v1 deprecation
On Thu, May 12 2022, Alex Williamson wrote: > On Thu, 12 May 2022 18:43:13 +0300 > Avihai Horon wrote: > >> @@ -767,9 +767,10 @@ static void vfio_migration_state_notifier(Notifier >> *notifier, void *data) >> case MIGRATION_STATUS_CANCELLED: >> case MIGRATION_STATUS_FAILED: >> bytes_transferred = 0; >> -ret = vfio_migration_set_state(vbasedev, >> - ~(VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_SAVING | >> VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_RESUMING), >> - VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_RUNNING); >> +ret = vfio_migration_set_state( >> +vbasedev, >> +~(VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_V1_SAVING | VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_V1_RESUMING), >> +VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_V1_RUNNING); > > Yikes! Please follow the line wrapping used elsewhere. There's no need > to put the first arg on a new line and subsequent wrapped lines should > be indented to match the previous line, or at least to avoid wrapping > itself. Here we can use something like: > > ret = vfio_migration_set_state(vbasedev, >~(VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_V1_SAVING | > VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_V1_RESUMING), >VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_V1_RUNNING); FWIW, I'd prefer this variant as well.
Re: [PATCH 2/9] vfio: Fix compilation errors caused by VFIO migration v1 deprecation
On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 03:11:40PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote: > On Thu, 12 May 2022 15:25:32 -0300 > Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > > On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 11:57:10AM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote: > > > > @@ -767,9 +767,10 @@ static void vfio_migration_state_notifier(Notifier > > > > *notifier, void *data) > > > > case MIGRATION_STATUS_CANCELLED: > > > > case MIGRATION_STATUS_FAILED: > > > > bytes_transferred = 0; > > > > -ret = vfio_migration_set_state(vbasedev, > > > > - ~(VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_SAVING | > > > > VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_RESUMING), > > > > - VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_RUNNING); > > > > +ret = vfio_migration_set_state( > > > > +vbasedev, > > > > +~(VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_V1_SAVING | > > > > VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_V1_RESUMING), > > > > +VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_V1_RUNNING); > > > > > > Yikes! Please follow the line wrapping used elsewhere. There's no need > > > to put the first arg on a new line and subsequent wrapped lines should > > > be indented to match the previous line, or at least to avoid wrapping > > > itself. Here we can use something like: > > > > This is generated by clang-format with one of the qmeu styles, it > > follows the documented guide: > > > > In case of function, there are several variants: > > > > - 4 spaces indent from the beginning > > - align the secondary lines just after the opening parenthesis of the > >first > > > > clang-format selected the first option due to its optimization > > algorithm. > > > > Knowing nothing about qmeu, I am confused?? > > Maybe someone needs to throw more AI models at clang-format so that it > considers the more readable option? QEMU does a lot wrong with style > imo, and maybe it's technically compliant as written, but I think what > I proposed is also compliant, as well as more readable and more > consistent with the existing file. Thanks, Let Avihai know any indenting you don't like he will fix it. IIRC clang scores line-breaking an expression as worse than going to the smaller indent. Personally I would agree with this. Thanks, Jason
Re: [PATCH 2/9] vfio: Fix compilation errors caused by VFIO migration v1 deprecation
On Thu, 12 May 2022 15:25:32 -0300 Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 11:57:10AM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote: > > > @@ -767,9 +767,10 @@ static void vfio_migration_state_notifier(Notifier > > > *notifier, void *data) > > > case MIGRATION_STATUS_CANCELLED: > > > case MIGRATION_STATUS_FAILED: > > > bytes_transferred = 0; > > > -ret = vfio_migration_set_state(vbasedev, > > > - ~(VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_SAVING | > > > VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_RESUMING), > > > - VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_RUNNING); > > > +ret = vfio_migration_set_state( > > > +vbasedev, > > > +~(VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_V1_SAVING | > > > VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_V1_RESUMING), > > > +VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_V1_RUNNING); > > > > Yikes! Please follow the line wrapping used elsewhere. There's no need > > to put the first arg on a new line and subsequent wrapped lines should > > be indented to match the previous line, or at least to avoid wrapping > > itself. Here we can use something like: > > This is generated by clang-format with one of the qmeu styles, it > follows the documented guide: > > In case of function, there are several variants: > > - 4 spaces indent from the beginning > - align the secondary lines just after the opening parenthesis of the >first > > clang-format selected the first option due to its optimization > algorithm. > > Knowing nothing about qmeu, I am confused?? Maybe someone needs to throw more AI models at clang-format so that it considers the more readable option? QEMU does a lot wrong with style imo, and maybe it's technically compliant as written, but I think what I proposed is also compliant, as well as more readable and more consistent with the existing file. Thanks, Alex
Re: [PATCH 2/9] vfio: Fix compilation errors caused by VFIO migration v1 deprecation
On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 11:57:10AM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote: > > @@ -767,9 +767,10 @@ static void vfio_migration_state_notifier(Notifier > > *notifier, void *data) > > case MIGRATION_STATUS_CANCELLED: > > case MIGRATION_STATUS_FAILED: > > bytes_transferred = 0; > > -ret = vfio_migration_set_state(vbasedev, > > - ~(VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_SAVING | > > VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_RESUMING), > > - VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_RUNNING); > > +ret = vfio_migration_set_state( > > +vbasedev, > > +~(VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_V1_SAVING | VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_V1_RESUMING), > > +VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_V1_RUNNING); > > Yikes! Please follow the line wrapping used elsewhere. There's no need > to put the first arg on a new line and subsequent wrapped lines should > be indented to match the previous line, or at least to avoid wrapping > itself. Here we can use something like: This is generated by clang-format with one of the qmeu styles, it follows the documented guide: In case of function, there are several variants: - 4 spaces indent from the beginning - align the secondary lines just after the opening parenthesis of the first clang-format selected the first option due to its optimization algorithm. Knowing nothing about qmeu, I am confused?? Jason
Re: [PATCH 2/9] vfio: Fix compilation errors caused by VFIO migration v1 deprecation
On Thu, 12 May 2022 18:43:13 +0300
Avihai Horon wrote:
> VFIO migration protocol v1 was deprecated and as part of it some of the
> uAPI definitions were renamed. This caused compilation errors.
> Fix them.
>
> Signed-off-by: Avihai Horon
> ---
> hw/vfio/common.c| 6 +++---
> hw/vfio/migration.c | 29 -
> 2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/hw/vfio/common.c b/hw/vfio/common.c
> index 159f910421..29982c7af8 100644
> --- a/hw/vfio/common.c
> +++ b/hw/vfio/common.c
> @@ -355,7 +355,7 @@ static bool vfio_devices_all_dirty_tracking(VFIOContainer
> *container)
> }
>
> if ((vbasedev->pre_copy_dirty_page_tracking == ON_OFF_AUTO_OFF)
> -&& (migration->device_state & VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_RUNNING)) {
> +&& (migration->device_state & VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_V1_RUNNING))
> {
> return false;
> }
> }
> @@ -381,8 +381,8 @@ static bool
> vfio_devices_all_running_and_saving(VFIOContainer *container)
> return false;
> }
>
> -if ((migration->device_state & VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_SAVING) &&
> -(migration->device_state & VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_RUNNING)) {
> +if ((migration->device_state & VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_V1_SAVING) &&
> +(migration->device_state & VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_V1_RUNNING)) {
> continue;
> } else {
> return false;
> diff --git a/hw/vfio/migration.c b/hw/vfio/migration.c
> index ff6b45de6b..835608cd23 100644
> --- a/hw/vfio/migration.c
> +++ b/hw/vfio/migration.c
> @@ -432,7 +432,7 @@ static int vfio_save_setup(QEMUFile *f, void *opaque)
> }
>
> ret = vfio_migration_set_state(vbasedev, VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_MASK,
> - VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_SAVING);
> + VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_V1_SAVING);
> if (ret) {
> error_report("%s: Failed to set state SAVING", vbasedev->name);
> return ret;
> @@ -531,8 +531,8 @@ static int vfio_save_complete_precopy(QEMUFile *f, void
> *opaque)
> uint64_t data_size;
> int ret;
>
> -ret = vfio_migration_set_state(vbasedev, ~VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_RUNNING,
> - VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_SAVING);
> +ret = vfio_migration_set_state(vbasedev, ~VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_V1_RUNNING,
> + VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_V1_SAVING);
> if (ret) {
> error_report("%s: Failed to set state STOP and SAVING",
> vbasedev->name);
> @@ -569,7 +569,7 @@ static int vfio_save_complete_precopy(QEMUFile *f, void
> *opaque)
> return ret;
> }
>
> -ret = vfio_migration_set_state(vbasedev, ~VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_SAVING, 0);
> +ret = vfio_migration_set_state(vbasedev, ~VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_V1_SAVING,
> 0);
> if (ret) {
> error_report("%s: Failed to set state STOPPED", vbasedev->name);
> return ret;
> @@ -609,7 +609,7 @@ static int vfio_load_setup(QEMUFile *f, void *opaque)
> }
>
> ret = vfio_migration_set_state(vbasedev, ~VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_MASK,
> - VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_RESUMING);
> + VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_V1_RESUMING);
> if (ret) {
> error_report("%s: Failed to set state RESUMING", vbasedev->name);
> if (migration->region.mmaps) {
> @@ -717,20 +717,20 @@ static void vfio_vmstate_change(void *opaque, bool
> running, RunState state)
> * In both the above cases, set _RUNNING bit.
> */
> mask = ~VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_MASK;
> -value = VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_RUNNING;
> +value = VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_V1_RUNNING;
> } else {
> /*
> * Here device state could be either _RUNNING or _SAVING|_RUNNING.
> Reset
> * _RUNNING bit
> */
> -mask = ~VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_RUNNING;
> +mask = ~VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_V1_RUNNING;
>
> /*
> * When VM state transition to stop for savevm command, device should
> * start saving data.
> */
> if (state == RUN_STATE_SAVE_VM) {
> -value = VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_SAVING;
> +value = VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_V1_SAVING;
> } else {
> value = 0;
> }
> @@ -767,9 +767,10 @@ static void vfio_migration_state_notifier(Notifier
> *notifier, void *data)
> case MIGRATION_STATUS_CANCELLED:
> case MIGRATION_STATUS_FAILED:
> bytes_transferred = 0;
> -ret = vfio_migration_set_state(vbasedev,
> - ~(VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_SAVING |
> VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_RESUMING),
> - VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_RUNNING);
> +ret = vfio_migration_set_state(
> +vbasedev,
> +~(VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_V1_SAVING | VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_V1_RESUMING),
> +VFIO_DEVICE_STATE_V1_RUNNING);
Yikes! Please follow
