From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=42396 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OMNtk-0003tp-Q0
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 09 Jun 2010 12:13:02 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <quintela@redhat.com>) id 1OMNgq-0006Qw-3e
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 09 Jun 2010 11:59:41 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:30986)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <quintela@redhat.com>) id 1OMNgp-0006Qi-Rw
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 09 Jun 2010 11:59:40 -0400
From: Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikvU3RF5gqwehIjQx6E0ek9QjqG9Dzs3OIZvJDs@mail.gmail.com>
	(Yoshiaki Tamura's message of "Wed, 9 Jun 2010 23:47:03 +0900")
References: <cover.1276085283.git.quintela@redhat.com>
	<AANLkTikvU3RF5gqwehIjQx6E0ek9QjqG9Dzs3OIZvJDs@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2010 17:59:24 +0200
Message-ID: <m37hm8qjs3.fsf@trasno.mitica>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH v3 0/5] Add QMP migration events
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Yoshiaki Tamura <tamura.yoshiaki@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Yoshiaki Tamura <tamura.yoshiaki@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
> Hi Juan,
>

> I don't know I have addressed the problem correctly, but here is my
> try to get "info migrate" on incoming side.
>
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2010-06/msg00417.html

I saw it, haven't had the time to look at it yet.

> Apart from that I have a concern on relation between newly introduced
> QMP Migration events and existing MIG_STATE_*.  Are they supposed to
> be 1 to 1 mapping? 

Good question.  In my tree I had info migrate being the same on
source and destination, but I didn't have async migration.  I have to
check with yours.

> If so, instead of calling
> monitor_protocol_event() everywhere, how about introducing a common
> function in migration that sets s->mig_state and emits QMP Migration
> events at once?

I did that locally, just that this is in the middle of a big cleanup.

I am not sure that is still enough.  We have:

- qemu status: running/stopped
- we have another state "incoming" migration that needs to be same level
  than running/stopped
- I think MIG_STATE_* should also be promotted to this level, but
  haven't fully thought how to do it.

Later, Juan.