From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:47286)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <dgilbert@redhat.com>) id 1XbS1q-0006ng-CH
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 07 Oct 2014 06:30:08 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <dgilbert@redhat.com>) id 1XbS1g-0007EN-H9
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 07 Oct 2014 06:30:02 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:24648)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <dgilbert@redhat.com>) id 1XbS1g-0007EF-8e
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 07 Oct 2014 06:29:52 -0400
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2014 11:29:38 +0100
From: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <20141007102937.GG2404@work-vm>
References: <1412358473-31398-1-git-send-email-dgilbert@redhat.com>
	<1412358473-31398-48-git-send-email-dgilbert@redhat.com>
	<54303CEF.6060606@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <54303CEF.6060606@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 47/47] End of migration for postcopy
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/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: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: aarcange@redhat.com, yamahata@private.email.ne.jp, lilei@linux.vnet.ibm.com, quintela@redhat.com, cristian.klein@cs.umu.se, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, amit.shah@redhat.com, yanghy@cn.fujitsu.com

* Paolo Bonzini (pbonzini@redhat.com) wrote:
> Il 03/10/2014 19:47, Dr. David Alan Gilbert (git) ha scritto:
> > +            mis->postcopy_ram_state);
> > +    if (mis->postcopy_ram_state == POSTCOPY_RAM_INCOMING_ADVISE) {
> > +        /*
> > +         * Where a migration had postcopy enabled (and thus went to advise)
> > +         * but managed to complete within the precopy period
> > +         */
> > +        postcopy_ram_incoming_cleanup(mis);
> > +    } else {
> > +        if ((ret >= 0) &&
> > +            (mis->postcopy_ram_state > POSTCOPY_RAM_INCOMING_ADVISE)) {
> 
> Instead of the >, it is perhaps nicer to use an outer if that checks for
> state != NONE?  Because in fact this check is for state != NONE, having
> ADVISE been handled above.

You mean something like this (untested) ?

  if (mis->postcopy_ram_state != POSTCOPY_RAM_INCOMING_NONE) {
      if (mis->postcopy_ram_state == POSTCOPY_RAM_INCOMING_ADVISE) {
          /*
           * Where a migration had postcopy enabled (and thus went to advise)
           * but managed to complete within the precopy period
           */
          postcopy_ram_incoming_cleanup(mis);
      } else if (ret >= 0) {
           /*
            * Postcopy was started, cleanup should happen at the end of the
            * postcopy thread.
            */
           DPRINTF("process_incoming_migration_co: exiting main branch");
           return;
      }
  }

Dave

> Paolo
> 
> > +            /*
> > +             * Postcopy was started, cleanup should happen at the end of the
> > +             * postcopy thread.
> > +             */
> > +            DPRINTF("process_incoming_migration_co: exiting main branch");
> > +            return;
> > +        }
> > +    }
> 
--
Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilbert@redhat.com / Manchester, UK