Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 000/124] VMState Simplification (Massive)

[Peter Maydell]

On 21 April 2014 18:25, Juan Quintela <address@hidden> wrote:
> I can split the series at any point (they make sense even without the
> rest).
>
> What about:
>
> 1,7,8: bug fixes/simplification
>
> 2-6: massive Unneeded version_minimum_id_old removal, but trivial per se
>
> 9-47: New testing framework and tests for integers and arrays of
>       integers
>
> This three should be no controversial.
>
> 48-86: Removal of _V variants and ends with removal of version_id for
>        fields
>
>        This shouldn't be controversial at all, but I agree that I can be
>        biased here.
>
> 87-124: buffers, pointers and structs, in weird combinations.
>
>         This shouldn't be controversial either, but depends on the
>         removal of version_id.  Why?  Because otherwise we should need
>         (roughly) to double the number of tests, as we have the testing
>         mechanism that is a super set of the version stuff.

Yes, this sounds like a reasonable split.

>> I'm not sure about merging the field versioning with the field test
>> function stuff, but I'm not about to try to fish the relevant patches
>> out of this enormous mess so I'll wait until they appear in a series
>> of their own before I comment on them.
>
> Well, at least I now told you were the patches are O:-)
>
> If there is a reason why you don't want to remove it (or anybody else),
> please let me know.

Mostly just that I think that for vmstate definitions "this new field
was added in version X" is natural and normal, whereas other
test functions are odd and generally the exception. So a simple
way to indicate minimum version for fields seems useful to retain.
I don't mind if you want to unify the underlying implementation,
but I would prefer to retain the _V macros for vmstate definitions
to use (and it has the additional advantage of avoiding the need for
touching lots of devices...)

thanks
-- PMM