From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:59124)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1Xhbjl-00041F-Tc
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 24 Oct 2014 06:04:56 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1Xhbjf-00029Q-PF
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 24 Oct 2014 06:04:49 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:49649)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1Xhbjf-00029M-Hk
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 24 Oct 2014 06:04:43 -0400
Message-ID: <544A2429.6040106@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2014 12:04:25 +0200
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1412358473-31398-1-git-send-email-dgilbert@redhat.com>
	<1412358473-31398-17-git-send-email-dgilbert@redhat.com>
	<543038FD.8030204@redhat.com> <20141023180042.GH7659@work-vm>
In-Reply-To: <20141023180042.GH7659@work-vm>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 16/47] Return path: Source handling of
	return path
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: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@redhat.com>
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 08:00 PM, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
>>> > > +static bool migration_already_active(MigrationState *ms)
>>> > > +{
>>> > > +    switch (ms->state) {
>>> > > +    case MIG_STATE_ACTIVE:
>>> > > +    case MIG_STATE_SETUP:
>>> > > +        return true;
>>> > > +
>>> > > +    default:
>>> > > +        return false;
>>> > > +
>>> > > +    }
>>> > > +}
>> > 
>> > Should CANCELLING also be considered active?  It is on the source->dest
>> > path.
> Hmm, possibly - but my intention here was just to round up all of the
> places that already checked for ACTIVE+SETUP so that I could add POSTCOPY_ACTIVE;
> only one of those places also checked for CANCELLING, so I left it out.

Ok, I would need to check the callers...  There may be bugs waiting to
be fixed. :)  For now I guess it's ok as is.

Thanks for answering my comments!

Paolo