From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Xu Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/6] vhost: log used vring changes Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:59:35 +0800 Message-ID: <20151222075935.GD7532@pxdev.xzpeter.org> References: <1449027793-30975-1-git-send-email-yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com> <1450321921-27799-1-git-send-email-yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com> <1450321921-27799-4-git-send-email-yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com> <20151222065552.GC7532@pxdev.xzpeter.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" , "dev@dpdk.org" , Victor Kaplansky To: "Xie, Huawei" Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F143F72 for ; Tue, 22 Dec 2015 08:59:55 +0100 (CET) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 07:07:25AM +0000, Xie, Huawei wrote: > On 12/22/2015 2:56 PM, Peter Xu wrote: > > Got a question here: > > > > I see that we are logging down changes when we are marking > > used_vring. Do we need to log down buffer copy in rte_memcpy() too? > > I am not sure whether I understand it correctly, it seems that this > > is part of DPDK API ops to deliver data to the guest (from, e.g., > > OVS?), when we do rte_memcpy(), we seems to be modifying guest > > memory too. Am I wrong? > > > > Peter > > desc buffer logging isn't included in v1, but in the patch 4 of this > patch set, and actually it is the major work in vhost live migration. Yes, it is. Thanks to point out. Peter > --huawei > > [...] >