From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ian Campbell Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 COLOPre 23/26] docs/libxl: Introduce COLO_CONTEXT to support migration v2 colo streams Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2015 11:42:12 +0100 Message-ID: <1435660932.21469.85.camel@citrix.com> References: <1435213552-10556-1-git-send-email-yanghy@cn.fujitsu.com> <1435213552-10556-24-git-send-email-yanghy@cn.fujitsu.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1435213552-10556-24-git-send-email-yanghy@cn.fujitsu.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Yang Hongyang , Andrew Cooper Cc: wei.liu2@citrix.com, wency@cn.fujitsu.com, guijianfeng@cn.fujitsu.com, yunhong.jiang@intel.com, eddie.dong@intel.com, xen-devel@lists.xen.org, rshriram@cs.ubc.ca, ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Thu, 2015-06-25 at 14:25 +0800, Yang Hongyang wrote: > From: Wen Congyang This seems to mix up forward and backward facing information in a single record? > Signed-off-by: Wen Congyang > --- > docs/specs/libxl-migration-stream.pandoc | 21 ++++++++++++++++++++- > tools/libxl/libxl_sr_stream_format.h | 11 +++++++++++ > tools/python/xen/migration/libxl.py | 9 +++++++++ > 3 files changed, 40 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/docs/specs/libxl-migration-stream.pandoc b/docs/specs/libxl-migration-stream.pandoc > index d41932a..7e1edaa 100644 > --- a/docs/specs/libxl-migration-stream.pandoc > +++ b/docs/specs/libxl-migration-stream.pandoc > @@ -121,7 +121,9 @@ type 0x00000000: END > > 0x00000004: CHECKPOINT_END > > - 0x00000005 - 0x7FFFFFFF: Reserved for future _mandatory_ > + 0x00000005: COLO_CONTEXT > + > + 0x00000006 - 0x7FFFFFFF: Reserved for future _mandatory_ > records. > > 0x80000000 - 0xFFFFFFFF: Reserved for future _optional_ > @@ -216,3 +218,20 @@ A checkpoint end record marks the end of a checkpoint in the image. > > The end record contains no fields; its body_length is 0. > > +COLO\_CONTEXT > +-------------- > + > +A COLO context record contains the control information for COLO. I don't know what Andy thinks, but this seems like a rather generic catch-all record type to me. It would seem better to have one or more more concrete records for different aspects (e.g. status of the secondary VM, although that seems like a backchannel thing too and as I mentioned before I'm not sure those should be interleaved in the spec in this way). > + > + 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 octet > + +------------------------+------------------------+ > + | control_id | padding | > + +------------------------+------------------------+ > + > +-------------------------------------------------------------------- > +Field Description > +------------ --------------------------------------------------- > +control_id 0x00000000: New checkpoint I think we already have a checkpoint record type, don't we? > + 0x00000001: Secondary VM is suspended > + 0x00000002: Secondary VM is ready > + 0x00000003: Secondary VM is resumed