On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 05:04:48PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 08:12:29AM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote: > > On 01/31/2012 07:15 AM, Andreas Färber wrote: > > >Am 31.01.2012 00:53, schrieb Anthony Liguori: > > >>On 01/30/2012 05:41 PM, Andreas Färber wrote: > > >>>Am 30.01.2012 19:55, schrieb Juan Quintela: > > >>>>Please send in any agenda items you are interested in covering. > > > > > >>>VMState: > > >>>Anthony specifically said that VMState were not affected by QOM and that > > >>>patches should not be deferred until the merge. Yet there's no review > > >>>and/or decision-making for a month now. Ping^2 for AHCI+SDHC. > > >> > > >>Do you have pointers (to pending VMState patches)? > > > > > >http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/137732/ (PATCH v4) > > > > > >It's basically about how to deal with variable-sized arrays. (Alex > > >mentioned it on one call around November.) I found ways to deal with > > >subsets of arrays embedded within the struct and variable-sized list of > > >pointers to structs but no solution for a malloc()'ed array of structs. > > >Maybe I'm just too stupid to see. Anyway, no one commented since Xmas. > > > > /me puts on his flame proof suit > > > > Don't use VMState. Just open code a save/restore function. VMState > > is too limited in how it handles complex data structures. > > > > I really believe the only long term solution we're going to get to > > here is something that uses a builder interface (like Visitors). > > > > Regards, > > > > Anthony Liguori > > So the TPM patches started implementing a visitor interface > for BER, they are still blocked, right? And by the way, I believe we really should switch to something like BER and just drop the legacy migration format - being non self delimiting makes it just too painful for words to abstract, and attempts to hide that mess behind a visitor interface will just cause more cruft to accumulate, and cause inefficiencies such as extra data copies. > > > > > >Igor posted (and refined for v2) a patch with a callback-based approach > > >that I find promising. From my view, unofficially Juan is the VMState > > >guy, he's been cc'ed. Are we lacking an official maintainer that cares? > > >Or is Juan the official, undocumented maintainer but simply busy? > > > > > >SUSE's interest is making AHCI migratable, and my VMState workaround for > > >that is simply ugly: > > > > > >http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/133066/ (RFC) > > > > > >Therefore I'm waiting for some resolution. > > > > > >Regards, > > >Andreas > > > > > > > -- > > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in > > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
