Re: [PATCH v5 09/13] migrate: Rename v1 address functions to v2 for clarity

On Wed, Mar 04, 2026 at 09:17:48AM +1100, David Gibson wrote:

On Tue, Mar 03, 2026 at 08:11:50PM +0100, Stefano Brivio wrote:

...

On Tue, 3 Mar 2026 12:53:23 +1100 David Gibson wrote:

...

On Sun, Feb 22, 2026 at 12:44:41PM -0500, Jon Maloy wrote:

...

Some migration address structures and functions have a _v1 suffix. This is confusing, since they are currently handling version 2 of the migration protocol. We are now going to introduce a new version 3 of the protocol, so we choose to give these functions the correct suffix _v2 instead. This is in correspondence with current reality, and will help make a clearer distinction between the old and the new versions of those functions.

Signed-off-by: Jon Maloy Reviewed-by: David Gibson

Stefano, this is a sensible cleanup independent of the rest of the series. Please apply.

Sure, I will.

What about 5/13, should I apply that independently as well, to start cutting down a bit on the series? Jon, thoughts?

No. Unlike 9/13, 5/13 depends on the earlier patches in the series.

Sorry, I mixed up 5/13 with a different one. Yes, going ahead and merging 5/13 also makes sense. -- David Gibson (he or they) | I'll have my music baroque, and my code david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you, not the other way | around. http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson