On 23 February 2016 at 05:11, hitmoon <zxq_yx_...@163.com> wrote:
>
> 在 2016年02月22日 19:03, Peter Maydell 写道:
>> You'd basically need to have extra VMState structures for the
>> devices themselves which just said "inside this M48txxISAState
>> is an M48t59State", and "inside this M48txxSysBusState is a
>> M48t59State" and referred to the existing vmstate for the
>> M48t59State.
> I add a new structure for m48t59_isa as follows:
>
> static const VMStateDescription vmstate_m48t59_isa = {
> .name = "m48t59-isa",
> .version_id = 1,
> .minimum_version_id = 1,
> .fields = (VMStateField[]) {
> VMSTATE_UINT8(state.lock, M48txxISAState),
> VMSTATE_UINT16(state.addr, M48txxISAState),
> VMSTATE_VBUFFER_UINT32(state.buffer, M48txxISAState, 0, NULL, 0,
> state.size),
> VMSTATE_END_OF_LIST()
> }
> };
>
> is this correct?
No. I said you needed to have a vmstate struct that said
"inside this M48txxISAState is a M48t59State", and your
suggested struct is not doing that.
thanks
-- PMM
