From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:43719) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1as7N4-0007AD-Ff for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 07:29:39 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1as7N0-0005yE-K8 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 07:29:38 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:59410) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1as7N0-0005yA-Ey for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 07:29:34 -0400 Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 14:29:25 +0300 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Message-ID: <20160418142704-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> References: <20160324102354.GB2230@work-vm> <20160324165530-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> <20160324175503-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> <20160324181031-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> <20160324174933.GA11662@work-vm> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC Design Doc]Speed up live migration by skipping free pages List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: "Li, Liang Z" Cc: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" , Wei Yang , "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" , "kvm@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kenel.org" , "pbonzini@redhat.com" , "rth@twiddle.net" , "ehabkost@redhat.com" , "amit.shah@redhat.com" , "quintela@redhat.com" , "mohan_parthasarathy@hpe.com" , "jitendra.kolhe@hpe.com" , "simhan@hpe.com" , "rkagan@virtuozzo.com" , "riel@redhat.com" On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 11:08:31AM +0000, Li, Liang Z wrote: > Hi Dave, > > I am now working on how to benefit post-copy by skipping the free pages, > and I remember you have said we should let the destination know the info > of free pages so as to avoid request the free pages from the source. > > We have two solutions: > > a. send the migration dirty page bitmap to destination before post > copy start, so the destination can decide whether to request the pages or > place zero pages by checking the migration dirty page bitmap. The advantage > is that we can avoid sending the free pages. the disadvantage is that we have > to send extra data to destination. > > b. Check the page request on the source side, if it's not a dirty page, send a zero > page header to the destination. > > What's your opinion about them? > > Liang > Both are ad-hoc solutions imho. c. put the bitmap in a ramblock, check it on destination before requesting pages. This way it's migrated on-demand. -- MST