From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=57955 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PmiPX-0004yB-Oz
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 08 Feb 2011 02:54:56 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <amit.shah@redhat.com>) id 1PmiPW-0005Kx-Vq
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 08 Feb 2011 02:54:55 -0500
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:54389)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <amit.shah@redhat.com>) id 1PmiPW-0005Kt-LH
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 08 Feb 2011 02:54:54 -0500
Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2011 13:24:49 +0530
From: Amit Shah <amit.shah@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: new->old version migration
Message-ID: <20110208075449.GC29281@amit-x200.redhat.com>
References: <20110207160751.GC25106@redhat.com>
	<4D504925.3000807@codemonkey.ws>
	<20110207195315.GA28096@redhat.com>
	<4D505C92.5040904@codemonkey.ws>
	<20110207215203.GA28658@redhat.com>
	<4D50A90C.1060701@codemonkey.ws>
	<20110208064214.GB28096@redhat.com>
	<20110208070714.GA29281@amit-x200.redhat.com>
	<4D50F460.5070402@codemonkey.ws>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4D50F460.5070402@codemonkey.ws>
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
Cc: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>, Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>, qemu list <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>

On (Tue) 08 Feb 2011 [01:44:32], Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 02/08/2011 01:07 AM, Amit Shah wrote:
> >On (Tue) 08 Feb 2011 [08:42:14], Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >>I see. I'm unhappy with the facts that
> >>1. if (feature) is spread all over the code instead
> >>    of just in migration
> >>2. it is also obfuscated with if (flow_control)
> >>    instead of plain if (migrate to qemu<  0.14)
> >>    so removing it will be much harder
> >>3. this forces anyone who wants
> >>    a VM compatible with qemu 0.13 to also lose data,
> >>    even if migration to 0.13 is never attempted.
> >If a machine is started with -M pc-0.13 then we can safely assume the
> >user will want to migrate to another 0.13 machine.
> 
> No, a user wants a guest that works.  If there was a bug in 0.13 and
> it's fixed in 0.14, then reintroducing the bug in -M pc-0.13 is not
> expected.

For this particular patch and use-case, the bug exists in 0.13 as well
as 0.14.  It's just the migration state that has changed, no other
guest- or host- visible changes.

		Amit