On 2012-06-01 17:28, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >>> So I won't object to adding a new API but if we do >>> it properly this won't help compatibility :( >> >> It will as this API does not touch the parts that affect the vmstate >> (ie. semantics of irq_count won't change). > > Yes but irq_count in vmstate is a bug. IMO even if we do > not change anything we should ignore irq_count on > load and recalculate it from what the devices supply.
I don't disagree. But this will only allow keeping backward migration support if we preserve the semantics of current map_irq somewhere - to keep the chance of calculating the legacy values for vmsave as well. Jan -- Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT T DE IT 1 Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux
