On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 01:19:58PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote: > In defining the device state, we tried to steer away from defining it > in terms of the QEMU migration API, but rather as a set of controls > that could be used to support that API to leave us some degree of > independence that QEMU implementation might evolve. That is certainly a different perspective, it would have been better to not express this idea as a FSM in that case... So each state in mlx5vf_pci_set_device_state() should call the correct combination of (un)freeze, (un)quiesce and so on so each state reflects a defined operation of the device? Jason
