From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NCzOM-0002yH-6v for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2009 12:41:30 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NCzOH-0002vB-Nj for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2009 12:41:29 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=37841 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NCzOH-0002v3-Bm for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2009 12:41:25 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:46459) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NCzOE-0003ID-5j for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2009 12:41:23 -0500 Message-ID: <4B0C1AB7.2070106@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 18:41:11 +0100 From: Paolo Bonzini MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <4B0952C9.9010803@redhat.com> <4B09F0CA.3060705@codemonkey.ws> <20091124131717.GD2405@redhat.com> <200911241335.35334.paul@codesourcery.com> <20091124134910.GH2405@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: Live migration protocol, device features, ABIs and other beasts List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Juan Quintela Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Paul Brook , "Michael S. Tsirkin" On 11/24/2009 03:30 PM, Juan Quintela wrote: > No, new -> old is way, way more difficult. New->old is way more difficult with the current migration file format. The current migration file format is not at all designed to be read by an older version. Or for that matter a tool that only cares about the state of a couple devices (this is IMNSHO much more important if it wasn't for the RHEL case that started the discussion). Thinking about the latter and using it to solve the former would be the right way to do it. Some time ago when I had just started at Red Hat I wrote a mini-library to parse qemu migrate data, and I couldn't believe that there was no length field anywhere. Luckily I needed only RAM and CPU data, so I only needed to know about a couple of extraneous chunks. Paolo