On 9/22/20 4:48 PM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
Paolo Bonzini writes:
I think we can just bite the bullet and bump the version number. Just like
not all boards are created equal in terms of migration compatibility,
neither are all devices.
Great. I'll add that to the commit description.
Unfo
Paolo Bonzini writes:
> I think we can just bite the bullet and bump the version number. Just like
> not all boards are created equal in terms of migration compatibility,
> neither are all devices.
>
> Unfortunately pflash is among those that need some care, but we have much
> more leeway with sd
On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 12:31:21PM +0200, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> Back to the SDcard, it might be less critical, so a migration
> breaking change might be acceptable. I'm only aware of Paolo
> and Kevin using this device for testing. Not sure of its
> importance in production.
FWIW, I only
I think we can just bite the bullet and bump the version number. Just like
not all boards are created equal in terms of migration compatibility,
neither are all devices.
Unfortunately pflash is among those that need some care, but we have much
more leeway with sdhci-pci.
Paolo
Il lun 21 set 2020
Philippe Mathieu-Daudé writes:
> On 9/21/20 2:24 PM, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
>> * Markus Armbruster (arm...@redhat.com) wrote:
>>> Philippe Mathieu-Daudé writes:
>>>
+Paolo & Kevin.
On 9/21/20 10:40 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Philippe Mathieu-Daudé writes:
>
>
On 9/21/20 2:24 PM, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> * Markus Armbruster (arm...@redhat.com) wrote:
>> Philippe Mathieu-Daudé writes:
>>
>>> +Paolo & Kevin.
>>>
>>> On 9/21/20 10:40 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
Philippe Mathieu-Daudé writes:
> As it is legal to WRITE/ERASE the addr
* Markus Armbruster (arm...@redhat.com) wrote:
> Philippe Mathieu-Daudé writes:
>
> > +Paolo & Kevin.
> >
> > On 9/21/20 10:40 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> >> Philippe Mathieu-Daudé writes:
> >>
> >>> As it is legal to WRITE/ERASE the address/block 0,
> >>> change the value of this definiti
Philippe Mathieu-Daudé writes:
> +Paolo & Kevin.
>
> On 9/21/20 10:40 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>> Philippe Mathieu-Daudé writes:
>>
>>> As it is legal to WRITE/ERASE the address/block 0,
>>> change the value of this definition to an illegal
>>> address: UINT32_MAX.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Ph
+Paolo & Kevin.
On 9/21/20 10:40 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Philippe Mathieu-Daudé writes:
>
>> As it is legal to WRITE/ERASE the address/block 0,
>> change the value of this definition to an illegal
>> address: UINT32_MAX.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
>> ---
>> Cc: Dr. David
Philippe Mathieu-Daudé writes:
> As it is legal to WRITE/ERASE the address/block 0,
> change the value of this definition to an illegal
> address: UINT32_MAX.
>
> Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
> ---
> Cc: Dr. David Alan Gilbert
> Cc: Markus Armbruster
>
> Same problem I had with the pf
As it is legal to WRITE/ERASE the address/block 0,
change the value of this definition to an illegal
address: UINT32_MAX.
Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
---
Cc: Dr. David Alan Gilbert
Cc: Markus Armbruster
Same problem I had with the pflash device last year...
This break migration :(
Wh
11 matches
Mail list logo
