* Cornelia Huck (cornelia.h...@de.ibm.com) wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Aug 2016 14:42:31 +0100
> "Dr. David Alan Gilbert (git)" <dgilb...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > From: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <dgilb...@redhat.com>
> >
> > Provide a vmsd pointer for VirtIO devices to use instead of the
> > load/save methods.
> >
> > We'll eventually kill off the load/save methods.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Dr. David Alan Gilbert <dgilb...@redhat.com>
> > ---
> > hw/virtio/virtio.c | 11 +++++++++++
> > include/hw/virtio/virtio.h | 2 ++
> > 2 files changed, 13 insertions(+)
> >
>
> > diff --git a/include/hw/virtio/virtio.h b/include/hw/virtio/virtio.h
> > index d2490c1..fd386ac 100644
> > --- a/include/hw/virtio/virtio.h
> > +++ b/include/hw/virtio/virtio.h
> > @@ -124,8 +124,10 @@ typedef struct VirtioDeviceClass {
> > * must mask in frontend instead.
> > */
> > void (*guest_notifier_mask)(VirtIODevice *vdev, int n, bool mask);
> > + /* Saving and loading of a device; use *either* save/load OR vmsd */
>
> Should we try to enforce this in some way? Then virtio_{save,load} can
> call either/or instead of fallthrough which may have unintended
> consequences...
I was thinking of doing that; but my intention is to kill off the save/load
methods ASAP.
Dave
>
> > void (*save)(VirtIODevice *vdev, QEMUFile *f);
> > int (*load)(VirtIODevice *vdev, QEMUFile *f, int version_id);
> > + const VMStateDescription *vmsd;
> > } VirtioDeviceClass;
> >
> > void virtio_instance_init_common(Object *proxy_obj, void *data,
>
--
Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilb...@redhat.com / Manchester, UK
