From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Anthony Liguori Subject: Re: [PATCH] qemu: qemu_fopen_fd: differentiate between reader and writer user Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2008 07:54:51 -0500 Message-ID: <48F7399B.7000808@codemonkey.ws> References: <1223829030-14962-1-git-send-email-uril@qumranet.com> <48F22BF1.3000608@redhat.com> <48F23D4D.2050709@codemonkey.ws> <48F23F42.10405@redhat.com> <48F277A0.8040407@codemonkey.ws> <48F2BA83.7000101@codemonkey.ws> <48F69AAB.4010404@il.qumranet.com> <48F6BFA1.9070608@codemonkey.ws> <48F6F7AA.2080102@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Uri Lublin , kvm@vger.kernel.org To: Avi Kivity Return-path: Received: from mail-gx0-f16.google.com ([209.85.217.16]:50482 "EHLO mail-gx0-f16.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752876AbYJPMy4 (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Oct 2008 08:54:56 -0400 Received: by gxk9 with SMTP id 9so8186330gxk.13 for ; Thu, 16 Oct 2008 05:54:55 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <48F6F7AA.2080102@redhat.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Avi Kivity wrote: > Anthony Liguori wrote: >> Uri Lublin wrote: >>> Anthony Liguori wrote: >> >> I have already cut your text, but I don't understand the comment >> about not being "full duplex". Is there a reason why migration needs >> to be bidirectional? I don't think there's a fundamental reason it >> needs to be and I think there are some advantages to it being >> unidirectional. >> > > Weren't there some acks flowing back on the old protocol to let the > source now things are fine? There were, but there aren't now. They don't improve reliability. Regards, Anthony Liguori