On 10/5/23 13:30, marcandre.lur...@redhat.com wrote:
From: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lur...@redhat.com>
Hi,
Implement RAMFB migration, and add properties to enable it only on >= 8.2
machines, + a few related cleanups.
Cedric, did you get the chance to test the VFIO display/ramfb code?
Nope. I was busy with VFIO stuff. I haven't even read Laszlo's
email yet. I will try this or next week.
That said, could we avoid adding another migration property in
VFIOPCIDevice and use the available "enable-migration" ?
C.
thanks
v4: (Laszlo review and suggestions)
- change migrate_needed() to assert(ramfb_exists)
- rename vfio_display_needed() to vfio_display_migration_needed(),
update the condition and associated comment
- move the ramfb-migrate option check and add a check for ramfb=on
- add a stub to fix compilation on some architectures
v3:
- add a "x-" prefix to properties, as they are not meant for users.
- RAMFB now exports a ramfb_vmstate for actual devices to include
- VFIOPCIDevice now has a VFIODisplay optional subsection whenever ramfb
migration is required (untested)
Fixes:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1859424
Marc-André Lureau (3):
ramfb: add migration support
ramfb-standalone: add migration support
hw/vfio: add ramfb migration support
hw/vfio/pci.h | 3 +++
include/hw/display/ramfb.h | 4 ++++
hw/core/machine.c | 5 +++-
hw/display/ramfb-standalone.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++
hw/display/ramfb.c | 19 +++++++++++++++
hw/vfio/display.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++
hw/vfio/pci.c | 44 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
stubs/ramfb.c | 2 ++
8 files changed, 123 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
