From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Anthony Liguori Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: KVM call agenda for Oct 19 Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 16:19:17 -0500 Message-ID: <4CBE0B55.6020208@codemonkey.ws> References: <1642827860.79861287521845369.JavaMail.root@zmail07.collab.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Chris Wright , Juan Quintela , chrisw@redhat.com, "Venkateswararao Jujjuri (JV)" , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, dlaor@redhat.com To: Ayal Baron Return-path: Received: from mail-qy0-f174.google.com ([209.85.216.174]:36066 "EHLO mail-qy0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754404Ab0JSVTV (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Oct 2010 17:19:21 -0400 Received: by qyk12 with SMTP id 12so803053qyk.19 for ; Tue, 19 Oct 2010 14:19:20 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1642827860.79861287521845369.JavaMail.root@zmail07.collab.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 10/19/2010 03:57 PM, Ayal Baron wrote: >> Yeah, concurrent is a little trickier. Simple solution is for a >> management tool to just do a stop + multiple snapshots + cont. It's >> equivalent to what we'd do if we don't do it aio which is probably how >> >> we'd do the first implementation. >> >> But in the long term, I think the most elegant solution would be to >> expose the freeze api via QMP and let a management tool freeze >> multiple >> devices, then start taking snapshots, then unfreeze them when all >> snapshots are complete. >> >> Regards, >> >> Anthony Liguori >> > qemu should call the freeze as part of the process (for all of the relevant devices) then take the snapshots then thaw. > Yeah, I'm not opposed to us providing simpler interfaces in addition to or in lieu of lower level interfaces. Regards, Anthony Liguori