From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:47064) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ewtmU-0006Ww-Ki for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 16 Mar 2018 14:08:43 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ewtmQ-0001cp-9W for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 16 Mar 2018 14:08:42 -0400 Received: from mx3-rdu2.redhat.com ([66.187.233.73]:58678 helo=mx1.redhat.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ewtmQ-0001cg-5c for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 16 Mar 2018 14:08:38 -0400 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D9072A1BE1 for ; Fri, 16 Mar 2018 18:08:37 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2018 18:08:33 +0000 From: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= Message-ID: <20180316180833.GJ3066@redhat.com> Reply-To: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= References: <20180316115403.4148-1-quintela@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180316115403.4148-1-quintela@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC v11 00/15] mutifd List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Juan Quintela Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, lvivier@redhat.com, dgilbert@redhat.com, peterx@redhat.com On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 12:53:48PM +0100, Juan Quintela wrote: > Multifd > > > Hi > > [v11] > > Changes on top of previous sumbimission: > - Now on top of migration-tests/v6 that I sent on Wednesday > - Rebased to latest upstream > - Everything that is sent through the network should be converted correctly > (famous last words) > - Still on RFC (sometimes it ends some packets at the end), just to > show how things are going on. Problems are only on the last patch. > > - Redo some locking (again) Now the problem is being able te send the > synchronization through the multifd channels. I end the migration > _before_ all the channels have recevied all the packets. > > - Trying to get a flags argument into each packet, to be able to synchronze > through the network, not from the "main" incoming corroutine. > > - Related to the network-safe fields, now everything is in its own > routine, it should be easier to understand/review. Once there, I > check that all values are inside range. > > So, please comment. Just a few very minor things I've noticed. No more comments from me, i'll defer to someone else for understanding of the actual RAM page handling patches Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|