From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:57509) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QZ7Vu-0002Zu-CK for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 21 Jun 2011 16:25:35 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QZ7Vs-0002jZ-S7 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 21 Jun 2011 16:25:34 -0400 Received: from mail-ww0-f53.google.com ([74.125.82.53]:49888) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QZ7Vs-0002jQ-Hm for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 21 Jun 2011 16:25:32 -0400 Received: by wwf26 with SMTP id 26so143277wwf.10 for ; Tue, 21 Jun 2011 13:25:30 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: camm@ualberta.ca In-Reply-To: <4DFF0D42.1010501@siemens.com> References: <4DF0F86E.8040307@siemens.com> <4DF12642.1050707@codemonkey.ws> <4DF12F90.8000106@web.de> <4DFF0D42.1010501@siemens.com> Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2011 14:25:29 -0600 Message-ID: From: Cam Macdonell Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] vmstate: Add unmigratable flag List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Jan Kiszka Cc: qemu-devel , Juan Quintela On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 3:05 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote: > On 2011-06-19 22:46, Cam Macdonell wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 2:39 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: >>> On 2011-06-09 22:00, Anthony Liguori wrote: >>>> On 06/09/2011 11:44 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote: >>>>> A first step towards getting rid of register_device_unmigratable >>>>> (ivshmem and lacking vmstate support in virtio are blocking this): >>>>> >>>>> Allow to register an unmigratable vmstate via qdev, i.e. tag a device >>>>> declaratively. >>>> >>>> I thought part of the problem with this was that for some devices (lik= e >>>> ivshmem), whether it can be migrated was dynamic. =A0It depends on >>>> configuration, state, etc. >>> >>> That only applies to ivshmem (the other user is device assignment which >>> is unconditionally unmigratable). And the ivshmem issue could easily be >>> solved by defining two devices, ivshmem-peer (or just ivshmem) and >>> ivshmem-master, eliminating the need for the role property. >>> >>> I don't think there will ever be a use case for a "transformer" device >>> that becomes unmigratable during runtime (would be a nightmare for >>> management apps anyway). >>> >>> If breaking the user interface of ivshmem for this is OK, I'll post a p= atch. >>> >>> Jan >>> >>> >> >> The migratability of ivshmem is not dynamic in that it doesn't change >> at runtime, it's set when the device is created, either role=3Dpeer or >> role=3Dmaster is specified. =A0So iiuc, this could work with ivshmem. > > So you are fine with breaking the interface? Everyone else as well? Then > I'll cook a patch to sort at least this out for 0.15. > To be clear, this would break the interface in that a device cannot specify whether it's migratable via a parameter? > Jan > > -- > Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT T DE IT 1 > Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux > >