From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: KVM call minutes for June 8
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 09:55:48 -0300
Message-ID: <20100611095548.3d256bfb@redhat.com>
References: <20100608150500.GA28492@x200.localdomain>
	<4C0E694F.8040607@codemonkey.ws>
	<20100608175952.5f43ea8f@redhat.com>
	<4C0EB281.80907@codemonkey.ws>
	<20100609121820.1f3bb47a@redhat.com>
	<20100609153107.GE28326@redhat.com>
	<4C0FBFDF.5050009@codemonkey.ws>
	<4C10B3AF.5000201@redhat.com>
	<4C10E064.5090106@codemonkey.ws>
	<4C10E3B2.9070905@redhat.com>
	<4C10F656.20305@codemonkey.ws>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>,
	"Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@redhat.com>,
	Chris Wright <chrisw@redhat.com>,
	kvm-devel <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, armbru@redhat.com,
	qemu-devel@nongnu.org
To: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:34013 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1755811Ab0FKM4D (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 11 Jun 2010 08:56:03 -0400
In-Reply-To: <4C10F656.20305@codemonkey.ws>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

On Thu, 10 Jun 2010 09:27:34 -0500
Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws> wrote:

> On 06/10/2010 08:08 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> > Am 10.06.2010 14:53, schrieb Anthony Liguori:
> >    
> >> On 06/10/2010 04:43 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> >>      
> >>> Huh, why this? Seems I still haven't understood all of qcow2 then... I
> >>> always thought that there's just a specific offset where VM state
> >>> starts, but no explicit end.
> >>>
> >>>        
> >> A live snapshot can last for a very long time.  What happens if you need
> >> to allocate a new block for disk I/O while saving a snapshot?
> >>      
> > You allocate it, I guess?
> >
> > Note that VM state must be virtually contiguous, but not necessarily
> > physically (virtually = on the virtual hard disk as seen by the guest;
> > physically = in the image file). It's just not seen by the guest because
> > it's saved at a high offset that is after the end of the real disk
> > content, but otherwise it should behave the same as guest data.
> >    
> 
> I guess you could just start writing and then once your finished, you 
> could update the snapshot information.  So yeah, I think your right that 
> it's doable with the current format.

 No more issues on having them in QMP for 0.13 then?