Re: [PATCH v1 5/9] hw/virtio: introduce virtio_device_should_start

[Michael S. Tsirkin]

On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 05:18:53PM +0100, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> Am 08.11.22 um 10:23 schrieb Alex Bennée:
> > The previous fix to virtio_device_started revealed a problem in its
> > use by both the core and the device code. The core code should be able
> > to handle the device "starting" while the VM isn't running to handle
> > the restoration of migration state. To solve this dual use introduce a
> > new helper for use by the vhost-user backends who all use it to feed a
> > should_start variable.
> > 
> > We can also pick up a change vhost_user_blk_set_status while we are at
> > it which follows the same pattern.
> > 
> > Fixes: 9f6bcfd99f (hw/virtio: move vm_running check to 
> > virtio_device_started)
> > Fixes: 27ba7b027f (hw/virtio: add boilerplate for vhost-user-gpio device)
> > Signed-off-by: Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@linaro.org>
> > Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
> 
> Hmmm, is this
> commit 259d69c00b67c02a67f3bdbeeea71c2c0af76c35
> Author:     Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@linaro.org>
> AuthorDate: Mon Nov 7 12:14:07 2022 +0000
> Commit:     Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>
> CommitDate: Mon Nov 7 14:08:18 2022 -0500
> 
>     hw/virtio: introduce virtio_device_should_start
> 
> and older version?

This is what got merged:
https://lore.kernel.org/r/20221107121407.1010913-1-alex.bennee%40linaro.org
This patch was sent after I merged the RFC.
I think the only difference is the commit log but I might be missing
something.

> This does not seem to fix the regression that I have reported.

This was applied on top of 9f6bcfd99f which IIUC does, right?


-- 
MST