From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Anthony Liguori Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 00/21] Kemari for KVM 0.2 Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2010 11:05:37 -0600 Message-ID: <4CF3DD61.2010102@codemonkey.ws> References: <1290665220-26478-1-git-send-email-tamura.yoshiaki@lab.ntt.co.jp> <4CF3D7A0.7010700@redhat.com> <201011291653.42595.paul@codesourcery.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: dlaor@redhat.com, Stefan Hajnoczi , Yoshiaki Tamura , ohmura.kei@lab.ntt.co.jp, mtosatti@redhat.com, stefanha@linux.vnet.ibm.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, vatsa@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Blue Swirl , aliguori@us.ibm.com, avi@redhat.com, psuriset@linux.vnet.ibm.com, ananth@in.ibm.com To: Paul Brook Return-path: Received: from mail-qy0-f174.google.com ([209.85.216.174]:35515 "EHLO mail-qy0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752580Ab0K2RFm (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Nov 2010 12:05:42 -0500 Received: by qyk11 with SMTP id 11so101955qyk.19 for ; Mon, 29 Nov 2010 09:05:41 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <201011291653.42595.paul@codesourcery.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 11/29/2010 10:53 AM, Paul Brook wrote: >>> 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. >> > That's not what I've been hearing earlier in this thread. > The responses from Yoshi indicate that Stefan's summary is correct. i.e. the > current Kemari implementation may require per-device hooks, but that's a bug > and should be fixed before merging. > It's actually really important that Kemari make use of an intermediate layer such that the hooks can distinguish between a device access and a recursive access. You could s/bdrv_aio_multiwrite/bdrv_aio_multiwrite_internal/g and then within kemari, s/bdrv_aio_multiwrite_proxy/bdrv_aio_multiwrite/ but I don't think that results in a cleaner interface. I don't like the _proxy naming and I think it has led to some confusion. I think having a dev_aio_multiwrite interface is a better naming scheme and ultimately provides a clearer idea of why a separate interface is needed--to distinguish between device accesses and internal accesses. BTW, dev_aio_multiwrite should take a DeviceState * and a BlockDriverState. Regards, Anthony Liguori > Paul > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >