On Thu, Mar 04, 2021 at 11:42:10PM +0100, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
On 3/4/21 9:16 PM, BALATON Zoltan wrote:
On Thu, 4 Mar 2021, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
On 3/2/21 10:11 PM, BALATON Zoltan wrote:
To allow reusing ISA bridge emulation for vt8231_isa move the device
state of vt82c686b_isa emulation in an abstract via_isa class.
Signed-off-by: BALATON Zoltan <balaton@eik.bme.hu>
---
hw/isa/vt82c686.c | 70 ++++++++++++++++++++++------------------
include/hw/pci/pci_ids.h | 2 +-
2 files changed, 40 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-)
diff --git a/hw/isa/vt82c686.c b/hw/isa/vt82c686.c
index 72234bc4d1..5137f97f37 100644
--- a/hw/isa/vt82c686.c
+++ b/hw/isa/vt82c686.c
@@ -609,24 +609,48 @@ static const TypeInfo vt8231_superio_info = {
};
-OBJECT_DECLARE_SIMPLE_TYPE(VT82C686BISAState, VT82C686B_ISA)
+#define TYPE_VIA_ISA "via-isa"
+OBJECT_DECLARE_SIMPLE_TYPE(ViaISAState, VIA_ISA)
-struct VT82C686BISAState {
+struct ViaISAState {
PCIDevice dev;
qemu_irq cpu_intr;
ViaSuperIOState *via_sio;
};
+static const VMStateDescription vmstate_via = {
+ .name = "via-isa",
You changed the migration stream name, so I think we have
a problem with migration... No clue how to do that properly.
I don't think these machines support migration or state description of
vt86c686b was not missing something before these patches that would make
it not work anyway so I did not worry about this too much. I doubt
anybody wants to migrate a fuloong2e machine so this should not be a
problem in practice but maybe you can mention it in the release notes if
you think that would be necessary.
Maybe just add in the description:
This change breaks migration back compatibility, but
this is not an issue for the Fuloong2E machine.
Hrm. If migration was never supported, why is there a vmstate
description there at all though?
That said, I don't think breaking compat is a problem: that's only an
issue where we actually have versioned machine types, which covers
only pc, pseries, arm virt and a very few others. I don't think this
device was used on any of them.