On 3 December 2013 21:19, Eric Blake <ebl...@redhat.com> wrote: > On 12/03/2013 01:59 PM, Peter Maydell wrote: > >> >> If a QEMU with this patch sends data to a QEMU without it, then the >> receiving end will think it should expect log_num array entries but the >> sending end is going to send log_max of them. Conversely, an old->new >> migration is going to send fewer array entries than the destination >> expects. Or have I misinterpreted how the VARRAY entries work? > > If a qemu sends data larger than the field, the source side is already > compromised.
Not if the reason it's sending data larger than the field is because it's a non-compromised QEMU with this patch which makes it send log_max entries regardless of log_num, surely? -- PMM
