Il 10/09/2014 14:09, Michael S. Tsirkin ha scritto:
>> > Yes.
>
> Presumably, your next statement means that guests can typically recover
> if parallel state is discarded in migration?
No, it means that I would not care just like for pcspk.
If they are using parallel at the time of migration, th
On Tue, Sep 09, 2014 at 03:40:07PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 09/09/2014 15:32, Juan Quintela ha scritto:
> > This breaks migration with old machine type, but as far as I can see,
> > parallel is only added when used, and if we are using it, we need this,
> > right?
>
> Yes.
Presumably, yo
Il 09/09/2014 15:32, Juan Quintela ha scritto:
> This breaks migration with old machine type, but as far as I can see,
> parallel is only added when used, and if we are using it, we need this,
> right?
Yes. But again, it only breaks backwards migration, which is not
supported upstream.
Paolo
>
Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> From: Pavel Dovgalyuk
>
> VMState added by this patch preserves correct
> loading of the parallel port controller state.
>
> Signed-off-by: Pavel Dovgalyuk
> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini
This breaks migration with old machine type, but as far as I can see,
parallel is on
From: Pavel Dovgalyuk
VMState added by this patch preserves correct
loading of the parallel port controller state.
Signed-off-by: Pavel Dovgalyuk
Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini
---
hw/char/parallel.c | 18 ++
1 file changed, 18 insertions(+)
diff --git a/hw/char/parallel.c b/hw
