From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 69C0CC5478C for ; Fri, 1 Mar 2024 07:19:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rfxAj-0004ZH-5n; Fri, 01 Mar 2024 02:19:09 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rfxAh-0004TL-H2 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 01 Mar 2024 02:19:07 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.129.124]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rfxAe-0005jt-Nh for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 01 Mar 2024 02:19:07 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1709277542; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=j/soitBp+vFJ7GScOSX3DZHi5PN4nbcadIJJTfurTv0=; b=VtPhTa+93w0TKi2kfWk217n0artiazZZuTQPOdJGKxBR3mutu2XwRqYtf3L48j7HSwJ7Yk q8oMVPjHOm/aQcJz7m/COtoROprQfsUrCEsEHjNOmnT4bGx0yaEb4MaKdgb/3p/RgF9dBh hE8BPcnKydCVYcMu13/3n/r4liF94tk= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast-mx02.redhat.com [66.187.233.88]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-427-5yreZ8jlN1WuIl2n-vA8lg-1; Fri, 01 Mar 2024 02:19:00 -0500 X-MC-Unique: 5yreZ8jlN1WuIl2n-vA8lg-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.8]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 649A5845DC0; Fri, 1 Mar 2024 07:19:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from blackfin.pond.sub.org (unknown [10.39.193.4]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 426D7C03488; Fri, 1 Mar 2024 07:19:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: by blackfin.pond.sub.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 2FA3921E6743; Fri, 1 Mar 2024 08:18:59 +0100 (CET) From: Markus Armbruster To: Peter Xu Cc: Fabiano Rosas , Daniel P. =?utf-8?Q?Berrang=C3=A9?= , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Claudio Fontana Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 00/23] migration: File based migration with multifd and mapped-ram In-Reply-To: (Peter Xu's message of "Fri, 1 Mar 2024 09:50:32 +0800") References: <20240229153017.2221-1-farosas@suse.de> Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2024 08:18:59 +0100 Message-ID: <87cyseqv18.fsf@pond.sub.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.4.1 on 10.11.54.8 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=170.10.129.124; envelope-from=armbru@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -21 X-Spam_score: -2.2 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.2 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.096, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Peter Xu writes: > On Thu, Feb 29, 2024 at 12:29:54PM -0300, Fabiano Rosas wrote: >> Based-on: 74aa0fb297 (migration: options incompatible with cpr) # peterx/migration-next >> >> Hi, >> >> In this v6: >> >> - Minor fixes to 17/23 and 19/23 > > The whole set looks good to me now. I plan to queue it before the > direct-io stuff. Any other comments / concerns from anyone? No. My remaining review comments all apply to the direct-io part, which got split off this series.. > Dan, would it be fine I queue the IO patches together? > > Thanks,