From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:48419) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gm16M-0005jZ-BQ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 22 Jan 2019 13:48:49 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gm16I-0006Ow-65 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 22 Jan 2019 13:48:44 -0500 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]:57286) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gm16F-0006A2-SA for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 22 Jan 2019 13:48:41 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098399.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x0MF5AOB047823 for ; Tue, 22 Jan 2019 10:06:08 -0500 Received: from e06smtp05.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp05.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.101]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2q658q8ucs-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Tue, 22 Jan 2019 10:06:08 -0500 Received: from localhost by e06smtp05.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Tue, 22 Jan 2019 15:06:06 -0000 From: bala24@linux.vnet.ibm.com Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2019 20:35:42 +0530 Message-Id: <20190122150543.16889-1-bala24@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Subject: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/1] migration: calculate expected_downtime considering redirtied ram List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Cc: david@gibson.dropbear.id.au, dgilbert@redhat.com, peterx@redhat.com, Balamuruhan S From: Balamuruhan S Based on the discussion with Dave and David Gibson earlier with respect to expected_downtime calculation, https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2018-04/msg02418.html got suggestions that the calculation is of not accurate and we need to consider the ram that gets redirtied during the time when we would have actually transferred ram in the current iteration. so I have came up with a calculation by considering the ram that could get redirtied during the current iteration at the time we would have transferred the remaining ram in current iteration. By this way, the total ram to be transferred will be remaining ram + redirtied ram and dividing with bandwidth would yield us better expected_downtime value. Please help to review and suggest about this approach. Balamuruhan S (1): migration: calculate expected_downtime considering redirtied ram migration/migration.c | 8 +++++++- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) -- 2.14.5