On 06/07/2021 18:29, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
On 7/4/21 4:48 PM, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
On 03/07/2021 15:19, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
Per the DP83932C datasheet from July 1995:
4.0 SONIC Registers
4.1 THE CAM UNIT
The Content Addressable Memory (CAM) consists of sixteen
48-bit entries for complete address filtering of network
packets. Each entry corresponds to a 48-bit destination
address that is user programmable and can contain any
combination of Multicast or Physical addresses. Each entry
is partitioned into three 16-bit CAM cells accessible
through CAM Address Ports (CAP 2, CAP 1 and CAP 0) with
CAP0 corresponding to the least significant 16 bits of
the Destination Address and CAP2 corresponding to the
most significant bits.
Store the CAM registers as 16-bit as it simplifies the code.
There is no change in the migration stream.
Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4...@amsat.org>
---
hw/net/dp8393x.c | 23 ++++++++++-------------
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
@@ -987,7 +984,7 @@ static const VMStateDescription vmstate_dp8393x = {
.version_id = 0,
.minimum_version_id = 0,
.fields = (VMStateField []) {
- VMSTATE_BUFFER_UNSAFE(cam, dp8393xState, 0, 16 * 6),
+ VMSTATE_BUFFER_UNSAFE(cam, dp8393xState, 0, 16 * 3 * 2),
VMSTATE_UINT16_ARRAY(regs, dp8393xState, 0x40),
VMSTATE_END_OF_LIST()
}
I'd still be inclined to change VMSTATE_BUFFER_UNSAFE for
VMSTATE_UINT16_ARRAY whilst you can do it without having to worry about
the migration stream being already broken, but anyhow:
Reviewed-by: Mark Cave-Ayland <mark.cave-ayl...@ilande.co.uk>
Do you want me to squash:
-- >8 --
diff --git a/hw/net/dp8393x.c b/hw/net/dp8393x.c
index 1d1837dbd38..4c2fa0aabbd 100644
--- a/hw/net/dp8393x.c
+++ b/hw/net/dp8393x.c
@@ -951,10 +951,10 @@ static void dp8393x_realize(DeviceState *dev,
Error **errp)
static const VMStateDescription vmstate_dp8393x = {
.name = "dp8393x",
- .version_id = 0,
- .minimum_version_id = 0,
+ .version_id = 1,
+ .minimum_version_id = 1,
.fields = (VMStateField []) {
- VMSTATE_BUFFER_UNSAFE(cam, dp8393xState, 0, 16 * 3 * 2),
+ VMSTATE_UINT16_ARRAY(cam, dp8393xState, 0, 16 * 3),
VMSTATE_UINT16_ARRAY(regs, dp8393xState, 0x40),
VMSTATE_END_OF_LIST()
}
---
Or send it as a new patch?
I don't mind either way. I think VMSTATE_UINT16_ARRAY is nicer, and it's very rare
that you get the freedom to make a migration change like this without having to worry
about compatibility. It's also really quick and easy to test.
If it passes your local tests and you would prefer to squash rather than re-post then
you can also add a:
Tested-by: Mark Cave-Ayland <mark.cave-ayl...@ilande.co.uk>
to the patchset. I included the list of guests I tested in the cover note, but forgot
to explicitly add the T-b tag.
ATB,
Mark.
