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 6A465D111A8 for ; Thu, 27 Nov 2025 15:44:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1vOeAA-0003la-4p; Thu, 27 Nov 2025 10:44:06 -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 1vOe9r-0003jx-UF for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 27 Nov 2025 10:43:50 -0500 Received: from smtp-out1.suse.de ([2a07:de40:b251:101:10:150:64:1]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1vOe9p-0003iq-ST for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 27 Nov 2025 10:43:47 -0500 Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org [IPv6:2a07:de40:b281:104:10:150:64:97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2D82621EEC; Thu, 27 Nov 2025 15:43:43 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_rsa; t=1764258223; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=nbALgHgddKsvHQ+glNR/DhXvkPFuN53VgRnNJc9gipo=; b=lZonWMzRr0dvyaUNdY6eUTEMWR4QAd3NMw0hFKw9x2HaM+1gGwmLphfRGtX7ngn6mQzlgK mvD8n6qcHWn1cZzENNGrs4xZRRplDP4480+x4A2x+QAbvpYxpuAzJl+8pnmrANDwb21jok y+LEEi25nMIQ/CaL5Xv6r3eIyTYhs2M= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1764258223; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=nbALgHgddKsvHQ+glNR/DhXvkPFuN53VgRnNJc9gipo=; b=0BKqSfvly7xNqB45NoVScT9cuHerkgjB7jqrtZwsfOC+AuqOuTfYbj+sZRSjlnXzQ8NS+l t7F7yy2kyMwxLIBA== Authentication-Results: smtp-out1.suse.de; dkim=pass header.d=suse.de header.s=susede2_rsa header.b=lZonWMzR; dkim=pass header.d=suse.de header.s=susede2_ed25519 header.b=0BKqSfvl DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_rsa; t=1764258223; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=nbALgHgddKsvHQ+glNR/DhXvkPFuN53VgRnNJc9gipo=; b=lZonWMzRr0dvyaUNdY6eUTEMWR4QAd3NMw0hFKw9x2HaM+1gGwmLphfRGtX7ngn6mQzlgK mvD8n6qcHWn1cZzENNGrs4xZRRplDP4480+x4A2x+QAbvpYxpuAzJl+8pnmrANDwb21jok y+LEEi25nMIQ/CaL5Xv6r3eIyTYhs2M= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1764258223; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=nbALgHgddKsvHQ+glNR/DhXvkPFuN53VgRnNJc9gipo=; b=0BKqSfvly7xNqB45NoVScT9cuHerkgjB7jqrtZwsfOC+AuqOuTfYbj+sZRSjlnXzQ8NS+l t7F7yy2kyMwxLIBA== Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9B0623EA63; Thu, 27 Nov 2025 15:43:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([2a07:de40:b281:106:10:150:64:167]) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org with ESMTPSA id KM7xFq5xKGkQVgAAD6G6ig (envelope-from ); Thu, 27 Nov 2025 15:43:42 +0000 From: Fabiano Rosas To: Peter Xu , =?utf-8?Q?Pawe=C5=82_Zmarz=C5=82y?= Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] migration: Fix writing mapped_ram + ignore_shared snapshots In-Reply-To: References: <20251126154734.940066-1-pzmarzly0@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2025 12:43:39 -0300 Message-ID: <87ikeveb10.fsf@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.51 / 50.00]; BAYES_HAM(-3.00)[100.00%]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[suse.de:s=susede2_rsa,suse.de:s=susede2_ed25519]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.20)[-1.000]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; MX_GOOD(-0.01)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; FUZZY_RATELIMITED(0.00)[rspamd.com]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; FREEMAIL_TO(0.00)[redhat.com,gmail.com]; DKIM_SIGNED(0.00)[suse.de:s=susede2_rsa,suse.de:s=susede2_ed25519]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; FREEMAIL_ENVRCPT(0.00)[gmail.com]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[suse.de:+]; SPAMHAUS_XBL(0.00)[2a07:de40:b281:104:10:150:64:97:from]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; DNSWL_BLOCKED(0.00)[2a07:de40:b281:104:10:150:64:97:from]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; MISSING_XM_UA(0.00)[]; DBL_BLOCKED_OPENRESOLVER(0.00)[suse.de:mid, suse.de:dkim, imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org:rdns, imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org:helo] X-Rspamd-Server: rspamd2.dmz-prg2.suse.org X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 2D82621EEC X-Rspamd-Action: no action Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a07:de40:b251:101:10:150:64:1; envelope-from=farosas@suse.de; helo=smtp-out1.suse.de X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 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, Nov 27, 2025 at 11:35:06AM +0000, Pawe=C5=82 Zmarz=C5=82y wrote: >> On Wed, 26 Nov 2025 at 21:42, Peter Xu wrote: >> > Now I start to question whether I should have that other fix of yours = to be >> > for this release or next. >> > >> > If this use case is completely broken, we shouldn't need to rush -rc >> > window, now I plan to merge all these fixes later when 11.0 dev window >> > opens. Let me know if you, or Fabiano, has any comments. >>=20 >> It is broken if you set ignore-shared and actually have any shared >> block, but what could work today is if you just toggle the >> ignore-shared flag on without setting up any shared blocks. In that >> case, writing will work fine, but reading will crash. That's how I > > Yep, I suppose either side of reliable failure means it's completely > broken. :( > > That's IMHO an important evaluation because we could modify the image > layout without worrying breaking others only if it's completely broken.. > >> stumbled upon this rabbithole in the first place: I forgot to unset >> the flag and was surprised by parsing error. Whether it is worth >> fixing now - I don't know, setting ignore-shared when there are no >> shared blocks doesn't really make sense, so most likely nobody does it >> on purpose. >>=20 >> In either case, I need to stop working on this for now, I thought this >> will be a tiny side project that'll help me get my first patches in >> (and get used to collaborating over email), but now it's growing in >> complexity and I have other things that I need to prioritize. >> Hopefully I'll come back to this within 11.x window. Thanks for all >> the help so far, Peter, Fabiano! > > Don't worry, thanks for all the contributions even so far! > > Your patch actually looks pretty good already and mergeable, I just > nitpicked things here and there as I want to double check on things I > stated, and make it slow to get thoroughly discussed. > > Personally, I think it's ok we queue this one already into -next together > with the other one, then we clean things on top. > > Fabiano, sounds good to you? PS: take your time reading, as long as you > agree we put it in -next only, then there's no rush. :) Yep, that's fine. > > Thanks,