From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1L0pQp-0002tB-0T for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 13 Nov 2008 22:33:15 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1L0pQm-0002sz-TN for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 13 Nov 2008 22:33:13 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=52126 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1L0pQm-0002sw-OK for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 13 Nov 2008 22:33:12 -0500 Received: from mail2.shareable.org ([80.68.89.115]:40723) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1L0pQm-00076k-Fs for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 13 Nov 2008 22:33:12 -0500 Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2008 03:33:10 +0000 From: Jamie Lokier Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] add file: migration support (r2) Message-ID: <20081114033309.GK2055@shareable.org> References: <200811131844.11491.paul@codesourcery.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200811131844.11491.paul@codesourcery.com> Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Cc: Charles Duffy Paul Brook wrote: > On Thursday 13 November 2008, Charles Duffy wrote: > > This patch adds support for migration to and from file: targets, moves > > common helpers between exec: and file: use cases from migration-exec.c > > to migration.c, and adds a qemu_fdopen() helper parallel to qemu_fopen(). > > > > Compared to the previous version submitted, it removes some cruft which > > was accidentally included, and documents the limitations of O_NONBLOCK > > on Linux with local filesystem access. > > I don't see any documentation. > > The documentation should make it clear that this is not intended as a > substitute for savvm/loadvm. > A "live" migration doesn't make sense if you're writing to an actual > file (rather than a FIFO) as you'll end up with unecessarily large > files. That's true. It would be better to use a slightly different format when writing to a file, which lays out the RAM linearly and overwrites re-dirtied pages during the migration. I'm not sure if "live" migration to a file is really useful. "Dead" migration is useful for suspending a VM to disk. -- Jamie