Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> writes: > On 21 March 2013 07:45, Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com> wrote: >> [Note cc: Jordan, who added flash to x86 in commit bd183c79] >> >> Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> writes: >> >>> These patches implement migration support for pflash_cfi01. >>> The first patch just drops some useless state so we don't >>> have to think about it for migration. >>> >>> NB that pflash_cfi01 is used in the x86 pc model. I think this >>> means that migration while the BIOS is accessing the flash >>> wouldn't have worked properly. Since migration from a device >>> with no vmstate to one with vmstate works OK this shouldn't >>> break cross-version migration. However x86 maintainers may >>> wish to review and confirm this for themselves... >> >> x86 maintainers may wish to *switch it off* until it's done fully and >> properly, by setting "pc-sysfw" property "rom_only" to 1. > > So does that mean that these patches can't be applied until > the rom_only property is set, or is that a fix that can be made > independently?
If your patches work, then applying them can't make things worse for x86 than they already are, can it? Thus, independent, I guess.
