From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:50028) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XhOnK-0005q1-Gx for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 23 Oct 2014 16:15:47 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XhOn8-00050F-CF for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 23 Oct 2014 16:15:38 -0400 Received: from mail-wi0-x22e.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c05::22e]:56695) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XhOn8-0004zx-63 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 23 Oct 2014 16:15:26 -0400 Received: by mail-wi0-f174.google.com with SMTP id q5so1757840wiv.13 for ; Thu, 23 Oct 2014 13:15:24 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Paolo Bonzini Message-ID: <544961D8.5040203@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2014 22:15:20 +0200 From: Paolo Bonzini MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1412358473-31398-1-git-send-email-dgilbert@redhat.com> <1412358473-31398-15-git-send-email-dgilbert@redhat.com> <5430378A.5030604@redhat.com> <20141023162331.GA21829@work-vm> In-Reply-To: <20141023162331.GA21829@work-vm> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 14/47] Return path: Control commands List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" Cc: aarcange@redhat.com, yamahata@private.email.ne.jp, lilei@linux.vnet.ibm.com, quintela@redhat.com, cristian.klein@cs.umu.se, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, amit.shah@redhat.com, yanghy@cn.fujitsu.com On 10/23/2014 06:23 PM, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: > * Paolo Bonzini (pbonzini@redhat.com) wrote: >> Il 03/10/2014 19:47, Dr. David Alan Gilbert (git) ha scritto: >>> QEMU_VM_CMD_INVALID = 0, /* Must be 0 */ >>> + QEMU_VM_CMD_OPENRP, /* Tell the dest to open the Return path */ >> >> OPEN_RETURN_PATH? >> >>> + QEMU_VM_CMD_REQACK, /* Request an ACK on the RP */ >> >> SEND_ACK or ACK_REQUESTED? >> >>> QEMU_VM_CMD_AFTERLASTVALID >> >> Pleaseseparatewords. Is this enum actually used at all? >> >> Please avoid the difference between QEMU_VM_CMD and MIG_RPCOMM_. >> >> Perhaps MIG_CMD and MIG_RPCMD_? > > Almost, I went with: > > MIG_CMD_INVALID = 0, /* Must be 0 */ > MIG_CMD_OPEN_RETURN_PATH, /* Tell the dest to open the Return path */ > MIG_CMD_SEND_ACK, /* Request an ACK on the RP */ > MIG_CMD_PACKAGED, /* Send a wrapped stream within this stream */ > > MIG_CMD_POSTCOPY_ADVISE = 20, /* Prior to any page transfers, just > warn we might want to do PC */ > MIG_CMD_POSTCOPY_LISTEN, /* Start listening for incoming > pages as it's running. */ > MIG_CMD_POSTCOPY_RUN, /* Start execution */ > MIG_CMD_POSTCOPY_END, /* Postcopy is finished. */ > > MIG_CMD_POSTCOPY_RAM_DISCARD, /* A list of pages to discard that > were previously sent during > precopy but are dirty. */ > > and > MIG_RP_CMD_INVALID = 0, /* Must be 0 */ > MIG_RP_CMD_SHUT, /* sibling will not send any more RP messages */ > MIG_RP_CMD_ACK, /* data (seq: be32 ) */ > MIG_RP_CMD_REQ_PAGES, /* data (start: be64, len: be64) */ > > the only oddity I get from that is from the 'SEND_ACK' you suggested; > since all my functions to send commands are send_ I currently have > 'qemu_savevm_send_send_ack' which while consistent looks a bit odd. Perhaps ping/pong? Paolo