From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/6] libxc/save: Adjust stream-position
 callbacks for checkpointed streams
Date: Mon, 11 May 2015 13:06:55 +0100
Message-ID: <55509B5F.4020408@citrix.com>
References: <1431119675-23847-1-git-send-email-andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
	<1431119675-23847-5-git-send-email-andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
	<1431344184.8263.33.camel@citrix.com> <555098D7.6090700@citrix.com>
	<1431345948.8263.40.camel@citrix.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <1431345948.8263.40.camel@citrix.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>
Cc: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>, Yang Hongyang <yanghy@cn.fujitsu.com>, Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com>, Xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 11/05/15 13:05, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Mon, 2015-05-11 at 12:56 +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> On 11/05/15 12:36, Ian Campbell wrote:
>>> On Fri, 2015-05-08 at 22:14 +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>>> There are some records which should only be sent once in the stream, and not
>>>> repeated for each checkpoint.  {start,end}_of_stream() become per-checkpoint,
>>>> and a new start_of_stream() is introduced.
>>>>
>>>> There is no resulting change record order, but the X86_PV_INFO and
>>>> X86_PV_P2M_FRAMES records are positively identified as once per stream, rather
>>>> than once per checkpoint.
>>> In the case of the latter judging from the comments this is currently an
>>> implementation detail and in principal we want to be able to resend the
>>> p2m frames as well?
>> Correct, and the spec regarding X86_PV_P2M_FRAMES was explicitly
>> intended to allow partial updates in the future.
>>
>> It is currently an implementation bug (or many) that the P2M can't
>> change during the live part of migration.
> In which case I'd suggest avoiding saying "positively identified as once
> per stream" since that gives the impression that this is per the spec
> rather than just the current implementation.

Ok - I will adjust the comments.

~Andrew