From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:55360) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XCVDn-0005OO-7N for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 30 Jul 2014 10:51:20 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XCVDh-0002hf-Ks for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 30 Jul 2014 10:51:15 -0400 Received: from [2001:41d0:8:2b42::1] (port=59045 helo=greensocs.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XCVDh-0002gP-FI for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 30 Jul 2014 10:51:09 -0400 Message-ID: <53D9065B.103@greensocs.com> Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2014 16:51:07 +0200 From: Frederic Konrad MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20140717110153.8352.80175.stgit@PASHA-ISP> <53D14707.7080509@redhat.com> <2596.37912172384$1406533875@news.gmane.org> <53D62210.9060903@redhat.com> <000101cfabca$07016870$15043950$@Dovgaluk@ispras.ru> <53D8B9F8.7090804@redhat.com> <53D8F0EE.1090706@greensocs.com> <53D8F491.3040202@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <53D8F491.3040202@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH v2 00/49] Series short description List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Paolo Bonzini , Pavel Dovgaluk , qemu-devel@nongnu.org Cc: peter.maydell@linaro.org, peter.crosthwaite@xilinx.com, mark.burton@greensocs.com, real@ispras.ru, batuzovk@ispras.ru On 30/07/2014 15:35, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Il 30/07/2014 15:19, Frederic Konrad ha scritto: >>> Start by submitting only the icount-based >>> implementation, the other can come later. >>> >>> Paolo >> Hi all, >> >> I think that's actually our implementation cover no? >> (http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2014-07/msg00677.html) > Yes, Pavel's series covers the missing bits of yours AFAIU. > > Paolo I think that our first patch set part (icount fixes and icount based=20 clock) is fully reviewed and can be upstreamed, but since the reverse execution mechanism itself is very similar between=20 our series and Pavels, while Pavel=E2=80=99s set goes further in terms of addressing IO replay, I suggest Pavel uses=20 our icount counter with his mechanism. In addition maybe this series can be split eg: the migration related series/the mechanism itself so it will be easier=20 for me to review your mechanism? Thanks, Fred