On Tue, 7 May 2024 at 16:47, Peter Xu <pet...@redhat.com> wrote: > > On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 04:12:34PM +0800, gaosong wrote: > > Just remove CONIFG_KVM would be OK? > > You're the loongarch maintainer so I'd say your call. :) > > If you're not yet sure, IMHO we should go with the simplest, which is the > original oneliner patch.
The original patch needs to also bump the version numbers when it adds the new field. Even when we do not wish to maintain migration compatibility, bumping the version number means that users get a (more or less) helpful error message if they try an unsupported cross-version migration, rather than weird behaviour. thanks -- PMM
