From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=59986 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PZjaI-00042N-Fu for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 03 Jan 2011 07:32:23 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PZjaH-0001Ls-45 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 03 Jan 2011 07:32:22 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:23873) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PZjaG-0001Lc-Sr for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 03 Jan 2011 07:32:21 -0500 Message-ID: <4D21C1D0.6060301@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2011 14:32:16 +0200 From: Avi Kivity MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <4D21BCF4.6020904@web.de> In-Reply-To: <4D21BCF4.6020904@web.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: qemu vs. kvm: When to flush the coalesced mmio buffer? List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Jan Kiszka Cc: qemu-devel , kvm On 01/03/2011 02:11 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: > Hi again, > > another subtle difference between qemu-kvm and upstream: > > When we leave the guest for an IO window (KVM_RUN returns EINTR or > EAGAIN), we call kvm_flush_coalesced_mmio_buffer in qemu-kvm but not in > upstream. When version is better? I can't find any rationales in both > git logs. We must flush on EINTR, otherwise a live migration can leave some mmios in the source host and not replay them on the destination host. (plus, as Gleb says, if you're in userspace you might as well flush) -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function