From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=34143 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PN7Ad-0002AZ-FG for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 29 Nov 2010 12:05:44 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PN7Ac-00016f-7p for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 29 Nov 2010 12:05:43 -0500 Received: from mail-qy0-f173.google.com ([209.85.216.173]:53112) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PN7Ac-00016Y-3A for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 29 Nov 2010 12:05:42 -0500 Received: by qyk1 with SMTP id 1so108958qyk.4 for ; Mon, 29 Nov 2010 09:05:41 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4CF3DD61.2010102@codemonkey.ws> Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2010 11:05:37 -0600 From: Anthony Liguori MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 00/21] Kemari for KVM 0.2 References: <1290665220-26478-1-git-send-email-tamura.yoshiaki@lab.ntt.co.jp> <4CF3D7A0.7010700@redhat.com> <201011291653.42595.paul@codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: <201011291653.42595.paul@codesourcery.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Paul Brook Cc: ohmura.kei@lab.ntt.co.jp, mtosatti@redhat.com, stefanha@linux.vnet.ibm.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org, Stefan Hajnoczi , dlaor@redhat.com, Yoshiaki Tamura , ananth@in.ibm.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Blue Swirl , aliguori@us.ibm.com, vatsa@linux.vnet.ibm.com, psuriset@linux.vnet.ibm.com, avi@redhat.com On 11/29/2010 10:53 AM, Paul Brook wrote: >>> Is this a fair summary: any device that supports live migration workw >>> under Kemari? >>> >> It might be fair summary but practically we barely have live migration >> working w/o Kemari. In addition, last I checked Kemari needs additional >> hooks and it will be too hard to keep that out of tree until all devices >> get it. >> > That's not what I've been hearing earlier in this thread. > The responses from Yoshi indicate that Stefan's summary is correct. i.e. the > current Kemari implementation may require per-device hooks, but that's a bug > and should be fixed before merging. > It's actually really important that Kemari make use of an intermediate layer such that the hooks can distinguish between a device access and a recursive access. You could s/bdrv_aio_multiwrite/bdrv_aio_multiwrite_internal/g and then within kemari, s/bdrv_aio_multiwrite_proxy/bdrv_aio_multiwrite/ but I don't think that results in a cleaner interface. I don't like the _proxy naming and I think it has led to some confusion. I think having a dev_aio_multiwrite interface is a better naming scheme and ultimately provides a clearer idea of why a separate interface is needed--to distinguish between device accesses and internal accesses. BTW, dev_aio_multiwrite should take a DeviceState * and a BlockDriverState. Regards, Anthony Liguori > Paul > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >