From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:56921) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZydkR-0001SO-VJ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 17 Nov 2015 05:44:28 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZydkO-0003b9-Mr for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 17 Nov 2015 05:44:27 -0500 Received: from relay.parallels.com ([195.214.232.42]:49903) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZydkO-0003Zz-Eo for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 17 Nov 2015 05:44:24 -0500 References: <1447687950-29350-1-git-send-email-den@openvz.org> <87ziycykyc.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org> From: "Denis V. Lunev" Message-ID: <564B04F8.4080305@openvz.org> Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2015 13:44:08 +0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87ziycykyc.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/5] QMP wrappers for VM snapshot operations List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Markus Armbruster Cc: Amit Shah , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Juan Quintela On 11/17/2015 01:33 PM, Markus Armbruster wrote: > "Denis V. Lunev" writes: > >> EFI based VM with pflash storage for NVRAM could not be snapshoted as >> libvirt configures storage as 'raw' and writable. OK, this is a libvirt >> problem. >> >> Another problem is that libvirt can not detect this failure at all >> as it uses HMP for this operation. This create snapshot/delete snapshot >> sequence passes silently. >> >> The patchset adds QMP wrappers for the purpose. >> >> At the moment I have placed 2.6 version into QAPI. Though (if you feel >> appropriate) I can change it to 2.5 :) This is up to you to decide. > Nice try, but I the soft freeze boat has sailed. OK. no problem >> Please note, this patchset is made on top of >> [PATCH for 2.5 v8 0/10] dataplane snapshot fixes > That one applies fine, but this one on top doesn't. Rebase? yep. The difference is really small there (just additional 'true' parameter in bdrv_find_all_snapshot). I think that I'll wait a day or two before rework to give Juan and Amit their chances to blame me :) Den