From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.4 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32720C4321A for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2021 14:47:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0297223158 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2021 14:47:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2390571AbhASOp3 (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Jan 2021 09:45:29 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([63.128.21.124]:20797 "EHLO us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2389466AbhASKEp (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Jan 2021 05:04:45 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1611050599; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references; bh=uJE0F33cZMQfWxlJld0rtbaTxrpyNj2SkPYOONCRxug=; b=Rg5tKtyed1UIKDoqnR9aVSt2Kfgpa6I2hYSG3vHChl8X62r6PHHFehZOsr89jg3FwtwZun DPGLWfp2XpU2kbHJoIrwmOyZrjOrGtJEd6C7KekloQokMm+xMIjrO8LB1O6IABol1mDCc+ cPwKmqvzwr6XaPkSlOehPE577ru/Wls= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-39-r1dRp5oVNaOO9PjcuK64uA-1; Tue, 19 Jan 2021 04:59:47 -0500 X-MC-Unique: r1dRp5oVNaOO9PjcuK64uA-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2EC581842140; Tue, 19 Jan 2021 09:59:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from redhat.com (ovpn-112-84.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.112.84]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 80B556A90C; Tue, 19 Jan 2021 09:59:30 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2021 09:59:27 +0000 From: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= To: Ram Pai Cc: Cornelia Huck , pair@us.ibm.com, brijesh.singh@amd.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org, "Michael S. Tsirkin" , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, frankja@linux.ibm.com, david@redhat.com, mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Halil Pasic , borntraeger@de.ibm.com, David Gibson , thuth@redhat.com, Eduardo Habkost , Richard Henderson , Greg Kurz , dgilbert@redhat.com, qemu-s390x@nongnu.org, rth@twiddle.net, Marcelo Tosatti , qemu-ppc@nongnu.org, pbonzini@redhat.com Subject: Re: Re: [for-6.0 v5 11/13] spapr: PEF: prevent migration Message-ID: <20210119095927.GB1830870@redhat.com> Reply-To: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= References: <20210104134629.49997b53.pasic@linux.ibm.com> <20210104184026.GD4102@ram-ibm-com.ibm.com> <20210105115614.7daaadd6.pasic@linux.ibm.com> <20210105204125.GE4102@ram-ibm-com.ibm.com> <20210111175914.13adfa2e.cohuck@redhat.com> <20210111195830.GA23898@ram-ibm-com.ibm.com> <20210112091943.095c3b29.cohuck@redhat.com> <20210112185511.GB23898@ram-ibm-com.ibm.com> <20210113090629.2f41a9d3.cohuck@redhat.com> <20210115185514.GB24076@ram-ibm-com.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210115185514.GB24076@ram-ibm-com.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.14.6 (2020-07-11) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.15 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: kvm@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 10:55:14AM -0800, Ram Pai wrote: > On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 09:06:29AM +0100, Cornelia Huck wrote: > > On Tue, 12 Jan 2021 10:55:11 -0800 > > Ram Pai wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 09:19:43AM +0100, Cornelia Huck wrote: > > > Actually the two options are inherently NOT incompatible. Halil also > > > mentioned this in one of his replies. > > > > > > Its just that the current implementation is lacking, which will be fixed > > > in the near future. > > > > > > We can design it upfront, with the assumption that they both are compatible. > > > In the short term disable one; preferrably the secure-object, if both > > > options are specified. In the long term, remove the restriction, when > > > the implemetation is complete. > > > > Can't we simply mark the object as non-migratable now, and then remove > > that later? I don't see what is so special about it. > > This is fine too. > > However I am told that libvirt has some assumptions, where it assumes > that the VM is guaranteed to be migratable if '--only-migratable' is > specified. Silently turning off that option can be bad. TO be clear libvirt does *not* currently use --only-migratable. What you're describing here is QEMU's own definition of this flag $ qemu-system-x86_64 | grep migratable -only-migratable allow only migratable devices Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|