From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ian Campbell Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH 0 of 8] Remove static variables from xc_domain_{save, restore}.c Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 18:52:55 +0100 Message-ID: <1306259575.7348.3.camel@dagon.hellion.org.uk> References: <19931.58561.758368.326386@mariner.uk.xensource.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <19931.58561.758368.326386@mariner.uk.xensource.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Ian Jackson Cc: "rshriram@cs.ubc.ca" , Jim Fehlig , "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Tue, 2011-05-24 at 18:02 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > Shriram Rajagopalan writes ("[Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH 0 of 8] Remove static variables from xc_domain_{save, restore}.c"): > > I ll do it!!.. I have been waiting for this. Thanks a lot for > > cleaning up this chaff! I was under the impression that this was > > some arcane legacy code that shouldnt be touched. > > No, it's arcane legacy code that we have been gradually cleaning up > :-). > > > One particular > > thing that I would like to do is to factor out the write functions > > (outbuf_*, noncached_write, ratewrite*, etc) into a separate file > > and make it sort of pluggable. > > Do you have a particular use case fot that ? Without a different set > of implementations I'm not sure that we need it to be pluggable. > > > (selfish :P) I wanted to introduce a patch that would overlap outbuf > > flush operation and guest memory copy operation instead of the > > current model . This might be helpful for > > both Remus and live migration of large domains. > > But yes, if that produces a speedup, certainly. > > > Shriram, does this have any impact on Remus? > > I think it should be OK but we should hear what Shriram has to say > (CC'd). You were replying to Shriram ;-) Ian.