[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 11/11] test-vmstate: add test case to verify

From: Anthony Liguori
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 11/11] test-vmstate: add test case to verify we don't change VMState
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 09:52:55 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv: Gecko/20110223 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.8

On 03/23/2011 09:17 AM, Juan Quintela wrote:
Anthony Liguori<address@hidden>  wrote:
On 03/23/2011 05:22 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
On 23 March 2011 00:16, Anthony Liguori<address@hidden>   wrote:
+    if (old_version != new_version) {
+        g_error("Version %d of device `%s' is available in QEMU, but schema still 
reports %d, please update schema.\n",
+                new_version, device, old_version);
+    }
Might be nice for these "please update" error messages to
include a pointer to a docs file explaining in more detail
how to do that?
(also>80 char line ;-))

diff --git a/vmstate/schema.json b/vmstate/schema.json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..23483ab
--- /dev/null
+++ b/vmstate/schema.json
@@ -0,0 +1,1176 @@
+    "cpu": {
+        "mcg_cap": "uint64",
+        "a20_mask": "int32",
+        "tsc_offset": "uint64",
This schema file appears to be board-specific (or at least
x86-specific) -- shouldn't the cpu/board/whatever name
be in the filename, so we have scope to expand the test
to checking migration issues for other platforms too?
It's not really.  Every VMStateDescription that is builtin into the
tree is in the file.

That said, the only target where the CPU is currently described by
VMStateDescription is target-i386.

Right now the file is generated via i386-softmmu.  There may be a few
devices left out because they are either not compiled into
i386-softmmu or are target specific.

We could complicate things further by trying to run against every
target and then building a union of all target outputs but I'm not
sure it's worth the effort at this stage.

(I don't care much about ARM migration breakages just at the
moment but I suspect that it will be becoming more important
by this time next year...)

Also since this looks like an autogenerated file that's going
to be going into version control maybe it should have a
comment header at the top of the "autogenerated, do not edit
by hand!" type.
JSON doesn't support comments..  I can add comment parsing to our
parser though.
We need to fix the ordering problem.

Dunno what you mean by ordering.

Whatever schema we have should be good enough to allow:
- describe me this blob that contains the state for this device.

Schema for VMState is different than what's used for this test case here. I agree, it's a harder problem than just what's being spit out here :-)

eepro100 at least is missing.  Althought I would vote to just change the
eepro100 "naming" to always use eepro100 or similar, and remove the
current hack of having to change the vmstate->name for each different

I just ran into eepro100 and my head nearly exploded.

I set the name to be eepro100-base and then just added that once. A better solution would be to separate out the fields such that we can have a bunch of VMStateDescriptions that all use the same fields.

I think we ought to merge VMStateDescription into DeviceInfo. For compatibility, we probably need a vmstate_alias name since the device names don't always map 1-1 with the qdev names. But this should eliminate the problem of reusing VMStateDescriptions for multiple devices.


Anthony Liguori

Later, Juan.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]