From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Ky77R-0001jC-2y for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 06 Nov 2008 10:50:01 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Ky77P-0001iC-E5 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 06 Nov 2008 10:50:00 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=41907 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ky77P-0001hz-6N for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 06 Nov 2008 10:49:59 -0500 Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:40813) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Ky77P-00024z-0c for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 06 Nov 2008 10:49:59 -0500 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (int-mx2.corp.redhat.com [172.16.27.26]) by mx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id mA6Fnwdp011177 for ; Thu, 6 Nov 2008 10:49:58 -0500 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id mA6Fnvmm002717 for ; Thu, 6 Nov 2008 10:49:57 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain (vpn-12-145.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.12.145]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id mA6Fnu7m011951 for ; Thu, 6 Nov 2008 10:49:56 -0500 Message-ID: <4913121A.3060004@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2008 16:49:46 +0100 From: Chris Lalancette MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: Possible bug in Qemu tcp migration References: <49130772.2040508@redhat.com> <49130DAC.8090207@codemonkey.ws> In-Reply-To: <49130DAC.8090207@codemonkey.ws> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Anthony Liguori wrote: > Chris Lalancette wrote: >> Anthony, >> >> If, instead, I add a 5 second sleep in between steps b. and c. on the source >> side, then the migration completes as expected. It seems that the "migrate" >> monitor command is actually returning before everything is complete, so killing >> off the guest on the source side makes the destination wait around forever. >> Unfortunately, I haven't yet had time to look at it in any detail to see what's >> going on in the Qemu side, but I thought I would give you a heads up, and maybe >> you have an idea of where to look. >> > > Can you try the latest SVN? Specifically, r5640. I took just that patch, applied it to my copy of KVM (KVM-78), and tried it out, and it seems to have done it. Thanks Anthony! -- Chris Lalancette