Alex Williamson <alex.william...@redhat.com> wrote:
> Ok, I think this might actually make everyone happy, but I've been
> known to be wrong about that many times before. Juan challenged me
> to find an rtl8139 migration scenario that fails when hotplug is
> not involved (and not switch device creation order since that's a
> usage bug). I couldn't come up with one. We had been arguing that
> a subsection didn't make sense for the change to rtl8139 vmstate
> because the needed function would be {return 1}. but what if we
> could detect if the VM had done any other hotplugs and only include
> the subsection in those cases. That's what this short series does.
>
> So, I hope Juan is happy because this preserves the migration ABI
> for the majority of the use cases, and I hope Michael is happy
> because it does so using a subsection. Thanks,
>
> Alex
I am happy.
Thanks a lot.
Acked-by: Juan Quintela <quint...@redhat.com>
