From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:35584)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1URNco-0007OA-Bk
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 14 Apr 2013 10:09:47 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1URNcn-0008Fc-Ei
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 14 Apr 2013 10:09:46 -0400
Received: from mail-ee0-f43.google.com ([74.125.83.43]:48735)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1URNcn-0008FU-88
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 14 Apr 2013 10:09:45 -0400
Received: by mail-ee0-f43.google.com with SMTP id e50so1902459eek.2
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Sun, 14 Apr 2013 07:09:44 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: Paolo Bonzini <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <516AB8A0.3040502@redhat.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2013 16:09:36 +0200
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20130411143718.GC24942@redhat.com> <5166CDAD.8060807@redhat.com>
	<20130411145632.GA2280@redhat.com>
	<5166F7AE.8070209@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
	<20130411191533.GA25515@redhat.com>
	<51671DFF.80904@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
	<20130412104802.GA23467@redhat.com> <5167E797.2050103@redhat.com>
	<20130412112553.GB23467@redhat.com> <51681DAA.3000503@redhat.com>
	<20130414115911.GA4923@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <20130414115911.GA4923@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH RDMA support v5: 03/12] comprehensive
	protocol documentation
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Cc: aliguori@us.ibm.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, "Michael R. Hines" <mrhines@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, owasserm@redhat.com, abali@us.ibm.com, mrhines@us.ibm.com, gokul@us.ibm.com

Il 14/04/2013 13:59, Michael S. Tsirkin ha scritto:
> > I agree assuming guest has lots of zero pages won't work, but I think
> > you are overstating the importance of overcommit.  Let's mark the damn
> > thing as experimental, and stop making perfect the enemy of good.
> 
> It looks like we have to decide, before merging, whether migration with
> rdma that breaks overcommit is worth it or not.  Since the author made
> it very clear he does not intend to make it work with overcommit, ever.

To me it is very much worth it.

I would like to understand if unregistration would require a protocol
change, but that's really more a curiosity than anything else.

Perhaps it would make sense to make chunk registration permanent only
after the bulk phase.  Chunks registered in the bulk phase are not
permanent.

Paolo