From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:41738) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gpWHE-00020h-FK for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 01 Feb 2019 05:42:29 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gpWHC-0003QY-6i for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 01 Feb 2019 05:42:28 -0500 Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2019 11:42:14 +0100 From: Cornelia Huck Message-ID: <20190201114214.4c2508d6.cohuck@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <70bf921f-ffc9-1629-b1d0-7fd32b906c4d@redhat.com> References: <20190130155733.32742-1-david@redhat.com> <20190130155733.32742-6-david@redhat.com> <9ab3f62f-9011-b4af-2221-075d36d47327@redhat.com> <20190201110859.7481c5be.cohuck@redhat.com> <70bf921f-ffc9-1629-b1d0-7fd32b906c4d@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 5/6] s390x/pci: Drop release timer and replace it with a flag List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: David Hildenbrand Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, qemu-s390x@nongnu.org, Collin Walling , Thomas Huth , Christian Borntraeger , Richard Henderson , Pierre Morel On Fri, 1 Feb 2019 11:37:56 +0100 David Hildenbrand wrote: > On 01.02.19 11:08, Cornelia Huck wrote: > > On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 22:21:01 +0100 > > David Hildenbrand wrote: > > > >> Thinking out loud: > >> > >> We should migrate the flag in the future. This is already a problem > >> right now, as the timer is also not migrated. > >> > >> If the unplug request is sent and we migrate before the guest can react, > >> the unplug would not happen. > >> > >> However, looks like migration of zpci devices is not implemented _at all_. > > > > Oh, joy. > > > >> > >> This does not matter for pci passthrough (main use case). But when > >> wanting to use e.g. virtio-pci-net, things are shaky after migration. > >> > >> So this is future work. > >> > > > > Hopefully folks running s390x guests are rather using virtio-ccw > > devices anyway... > > > > I agree that this needs to be taken care of on top of these changes. > > Should we mark zpci devices unmigratable, or does it work for some > > values of "work"? > > > > It works if the guest never configures a zpci device I guess ... so I > think this is pretty much broken. E.g. the state of the zpci device is > not even migrated unless I am missing something. Ok, that seems to call for marking zpci devices unmigratable...