Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 00/21] Kemari for KVM 0.2

Dor Laor
2010-11-29T16:41:46Z

On 11/29/2010 06:23 PM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 3:00 PM, Yoshiaki Tamura
> <tamura.yoshiaki@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
>> 2010/11/29 Paul Brook<paul@codesourcery.com>:
>>>>> If devices incorrectly claim support for live migration, then that should
>>>>> also be fixed, either by removing the broken code or by making it work.
>>>>
>>>> I totally agree with you.
>>>>
>>>>> AFAICT your current proposal is just feeding back the results of some
>>>>> fairly specific QA testing. I'd rather not get into that game. The
>>>>> correct response in the context of upstream development is to file a bug
>>>>> and/or fix the code. We already have config files that allow third party
>>>>> packagers to remove devices they don't want to support.
>>>>
>>>> Sorry, I didn't get what you're trying to tell me. My plan would
>>>> be to initially start from a subset of devices, and gradually
>>>> grow the number of devices that Kemari works with. While this
>>>> process, it'll include what you said above, file a but and/or fix
>>>> the code. Am I missing what you're saying?
>>>
>>> My point is that the whitelist shouldn't exist at all. Devices either support
>>> migration or they don't. Having some sort of separate whitelist is the wrong
>>> way to determine which devices support migration.
>>
>> Alright!
>>
>> Then if a user encounters a problem with Kemari, we'll fix Kemari
>> or the devices or both. Correct?
>
> Is this a fair summary: any device that supports live migration workw
> under Kemari?

It might be fair summary but practically we barely have live migration
working w/o Kemari. In addition, last I checked Kemari needs additional
hooks and it will be too hard to keep that out of tree until all devices
get it.

>
> (If such a device does not work under Kemari then this is a bug that
> needs to be fixed in live migration, Kemari, or the device.)
>
> Stefan