Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 01/15] x86/pmtimer: Move ACPI registers from PMTState to hvm_domain

[Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 12/01/2016 11:29 AM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 01/12/16 16:28, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
>> On 12/01/2016 10:52 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> --- a/xen/include/public/arch-x86/hvm/save.h
>>>> +++ b/xen/include/public/arch-x86/hvm/save.h
>>>> @@ -525,16 +525,16 @@ DECLARE_HVM_SAVE_TYPE(HPET, 12, struct hvm_hw_hpet);
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  /*
>>>> - * PM timer
>>>> + * ACPI registers
>>>>   */
>>>>  
>>>> -struct hvm_hw_pmtimer {
>>>> +struct hvm_hw_acpi {
>>>>      uint32_t tmr_val;   /* PM_TMR_BLK.TMR_VAL: 32bit free-running counter 
>>>> */
>>>>      uint16_t pm1a_sts;  /* PM1a_EVT_BLK.PM1a_STS: status register */
>>>>      uint16_t pm1a_en;   /* PM1a_EVT_BLK.PM1a_EN: enable register */
>>>>  };
>>>>  
>>>> -DECLARE_HVM_SAVE_TYPE(PMTIMER, 13, struct hvm_hw_pmtimer);
>>>> +DECLARE_HVM_SAVE_TYPE(ACPI, 13, struct hvm_hw_acpi);
>>> However much I appreciate this switch to a better name, I'm not
>>> convinced we can actually do this as easily: There's no
>>> __XEN_TOOLS__ guard anywhere in this file, and hence everything
>>> here is part of the stable ABI. I'm afraid you minimally will have to
>>> add interface version guards, retaining the old naming for old
>>> consumers.
>> Right, I haven't though about out-of-tree users. Should new fields
>> (added in patch 7) also be guarded?
> Be aware that my Hypervisor migration v2 plans (which follow the CPUID
> plans) will remove all of this (as it should never have gotten into the
> ABI to start with), and replace it with something looking suspiciously
> like the other migration v2 stream formats.
>
> If you can get away without changing names for now, probably best to
> just leave comment.

OK, I can leave it as pmtimer then.

-boris

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel