Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/7] Convert pc cpu to qdev

[Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>]

On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 10:32:37AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 03/14/2012 10:23 AM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 02:49:59PM +0100, Vasilis Liaskovitis wrote:
> >>Hi,
> >>
> >>On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 09:37:18AM +0100, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> >>>On 03/14/2012 08:59 AM, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> >>>>not accepted, so I don't know how to take part in.
> >>>
> >>>As I see it, there is not much to do from cpu hot-plug perspective.
> >>>It's just a matter of adaptation QOM-ified cpus for usage from
> >>>qdev device_add, and I'm working on it.
> >>>However, there is a lot to be done in cpu unplug area:
> >>>   - host side: there is unaccepted patches to destroy vcpu
> >>>     during VM-lifecycle. They are still need to be worked on:
> >>>      "[Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0] A series patches for kvm&qemu to enable vcpu destruction in kvm"
> >>>   - linux guest side: kernel can receive ACPI request to unplug cpu,
> >>>     but does nothing with it (last time I've tested it with 3.2 kernel),
> >>>     You might wish to look at following mail threads:
> >>>       https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/9/30/18
> >>>       http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2011-10/msg02254.html
> >>
> >>I also plan to resubmit the qemu-side of ACPI cpu unplug request:
> >>http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2012-01/msg03037.html
> >>so that they work independently of the "host side" patches mentioned above.
> >>
> >>It would be great for the QOMify/hotplug/icc patches to be accepted soon,
> >>since this would make unplug testing/development more straightoward.
> >>
> >On a different note, are your going to continue working on your memory hot plug series?
> >I am going to look at it now.
> 
> Memory hotplug..  that's going to be fun :-)
> 
Why? What fundamental difficultly do you anticipate?

--
			Gleb.