Hi, >> (vmstate.h is getting hugely repetitive to the point that I'm >> really tempted to say we should just autogenerate it. That way >> you could define a fairly small set of things (arrays, base types, >> safe vs unsafe, etc) and have a script generate the cross product, >> rather than the current setup where there is a lot of hand written >> repetition and a tendency to gaps in the coverage where nobody's >> using them yet.)
> I can recall a qemu-devel discussion over a long-term QOM goals a while > ago.Somebody suggested that in the future we will define devices state > structures using some special macro which will be parsed during > compilation, serializing each member for both QOM introspection and vmstate > migration. That is where I see the future too. Michael Roth [ cc'ed ] has this on his agenda. We have code generation infrastructure for qapi and it surely makes sense to reuse that for vmstate. cheers, Gerd
