Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call agenda for tuesday 31

["Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>]

On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 05:04:48PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 08:12:29AM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> > On 01/31/2012 07:15 AM, Andreas Färber wrote:
> > >Am 31.01.2012 00:53, schrieb Anthony Liguori:
> > >>On 01/30/2012 05:41 PM, Andreas Färber wrote:
> > >>>Am 30.01.2012 19:55, schrieb Juan Quintela:
> > >>>>Please send in any agenda items you are interested in covering.
> > >
> > >>>VMState:
> > >>>Anthony specifically said that VMState were not affected by QOM and that
> > >>>patches should not be deferred until the merge. Yet there's no review
> > >>>and/or decision-making for a month now. Ping^2 for AHCI+SDHC.
> > >>
> > >>Do you have pointers (to pending VMState patches)?
> > >
> > >http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/137732/ (PATCH v4)
> > >
> > >It's basically about how to deal with variable-sized arrays. (Alex
> > >mentioned it on one call around November.) I found ways to deal with
> > >subsets of arrays embedded within the struct and variable-sized list of
> > >pointers to structs but no solution for a malloc()'ed array of structs.
> > >Maybe I'm just too stupid to see. Anyway, no one commented since Xmas.
> > 
> > /me puts on his flame proof suit
> > 
> > Don't use VMState.  Just open code a save/restore function.  VMState
> > is too limited in how it handles complex data structures.
> > 
> > I really believe the only long term solution we're going to get to
> > here is something that uses a builder interface (like Visitors).
> > 
> > Regards,
> > 
> > Anthony Liguori
> 
> So the TPM patches started implementing a visitor interface
> for BER, they are still blocked, right?

And by the way, I believe we really should switch to
something like BER and just drop the legacy migration
format - being non self delimiting makes it just too
painful for words to abstract, and attempts to
hide that mess behind a visitor interface will just cause
more cruft to accumulate, and cause inefficiencies
such as extra data copies.

> > >
> > >Igor posted (and refined for v2) a patch with a callback-based approach
> > >that I find promising. From my view, unofficially Juan is the VMState
> > >guy, he's been cc'ed. Are we lacking an official maintainer that cares?
> > >Or is Juan the official, undocumented maintainer but simply busy?
> > >
> > >SUSE's interest is making AHCI migratable, and my VMState workaround for
> > >that is simply ugly:
> > >
> > >http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/133066/ (RFC)
> > >
> > >Therefore I'm waiting for some resolution.
> > >
> > >Regards,
> > >Andreas
> > >
> > 
> > --
> > 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