On Fri, Mar 29, 2019 at 09:51:06AM +0800, Yi Sun wrote:
> On 19-03-28 18:49:32, Peter Xu wrote:
> > When introducing the initial support for scalable mode we added a
> > new field into vmstate however we blindly migrate that field without
> > notice. That'll break migration no matter forward or ba
On 19-03-28 18:49:32, Peter Xu wrote:
> When introducing the initial support for scalable mode we added a
> new field into vmstate however we blindly migrate that field without
> notice. That'll break migration no matter forward or backward.
>
Just curious, what is the scenario to break migration
When introducing the initial support for scalable mode we added a
new field into vmstate however we blindly migrate that field without
notice. That'll break migration no matter forward or backward.
The normal way should be that we use something like
VMSTATE_UINT32_TEST() or subsections for the ne
