Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v8 02/11] migration: pass MigrationIncomingState* into migration check functions

[Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>]

On Fri, Jun 09, 2017 at 09:21:38AM +0300, Alexey Perevalov wrote:
> On 06/09/2017 07:10 AM, Peter Xu wrote:
> >On Wed, Jun 07, 2017 at 12:46:29PM +0300, Alexey Perevalov wrote:
> >>That tiny refactoring is necessary to be able to set
> >>UFFD_FEATURE_THREAD_ID while requesting features, and then
> >>to create downtime context in case when kernel supports it.
> >>
> >>Signed-off-by: Alexey Perevalov <a.perevalov@samsung.com>
> >>---
> >>  migration/migration.c    |  3 ++-
> >>  migration/postcopy-ram.c | 10 +++++-----
> >>  migration/postcopy-ram.h |  2 +-
> >>  migration/savevm.c       |  2 +-
> >>  4 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> >>
> >>diff --git a/migration/migration.c b/migration/migration.c
> >>index 48c94c9..2a77636 100644
> >>--- a/migration/migration.c
> >>+++ b/migration/migration.c
> >>@@ -726,6 +726,7 @@ void qmp_migrate_set_capabilities(MigrationCapabilityStatusList *params,
> >>                                    Error **errp)
> >>  {
> >>      MigrationState *s = migrate_get_current();
> >>+    MigrationIncomingState *mis = migration_incoming_get_current();
> >If this patch is only servicing patch 6, I'd prefer in patch 6 we call
> >migration_incoming_get_current() (rather than here), then this patch
> >may be dropped?...
> I planed this patch as preparation, I used to separate refactoring from main
> change, for
> easy merging while rebasing.
> mis - is necessary here to have the same behaviour as before.

Could I ask what's the "same behavior" you mentioned?

I thought this patch is only used by patch 6 when creating the
blocktime struct (but not really a clean-up), no?

-- 
Peter Xu