On Fri, Jun 01, 2012 at 05:54:15PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote: > 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
We don't need to preserve it, right? We can calculate it before savevm. > -- > Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT T DE IT 1 > Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux
