From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:33967) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S652y-00066l-FG for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 09 Mar 2012 14:00:16 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S652b-0007SS-5G for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 09 Mar 2012 14:00:12 -0500 Received: from thoth.sbs.de ([192.35.17.2]:29012) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S652a-0007S3-Lu for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 09 Mar 2012 13:59:49 -0500 Message-ID: <4F5A5320.1070607@siemens.com> Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2012 19:59:44 +0100 From: Jan Kiszka MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1331316786-7752-1-git-send-email-lcapitulino@redhat.com> <1331316786-7752-4-git-send-email-lcapitulino@redhat.com> <4F5A4A08.8030805@siemens.com> <4F5A4C98.6050401@us.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <4F5A4C98.6050401@us.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/4] Purge migration of (almost) everything to do with monitors List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Anthony Liguori Cc: "pbonzini@redhat.com" , "quintela@redhat.com" , "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" , Luiz Capitulino On 2012-03-09 19:31, Anthony Liguori wrote: > On 03/09/2012 12:20 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: >> On 2012-03-09 19:13, Luiz Capitulino wrote: >>> The Monitor object is passed back and forth within the migration/savevm >>> code so that it can print errors and progress to the user. >>> >>> However, that approach assumes a HMP monitor, being completely invalid >>> in QMP. >>> >>> This commit drops almost every single usage of the Monitor object, all >>> monitor_printf() calls have been converted into DPRINTF() ones. >> >> I guess for most printfs, this is OK. But do you provide an alternative >> for the block migration progress output? I did not find anything on >> first glance. That is not a debugging feature. > > The block migration progress stuff is horribly broken and I regret ever merging > it. Are you actively relying on this? > > Does block migration even work? The last time I tried (a while back), it worked for me, but I also received reports that it was not working reliably. > > Could we just remove block migration entirely... Well, if we have a better alternative, replace it. Jan -- Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT T DE IT 1 Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux