From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:59748) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ctfT8-0004bC-I1 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 15:10:51 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ctfT5-0005ie-63 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 15:10:50 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:50468) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ctfT4-0005hm-WF for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 15:10:47 -0400 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.13]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E24007E9CE for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 19:10:45 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 20:10:42 +0100 From: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" Message-ID: <20170330191042.GN2800@work-vm> References: <20170323204544.12015-1-quintela@redhat.com> <20170323204544.12015-43-quintela@redhat.com> <20170330090705.GC2800@work-vm> <87tw6bm1u9.fsf@secure.mitica> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87tw6bm1u9.fsf@secure.mitica> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 42/51] ram: Pass RAMBlock to bitmap_sync List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Juan Quintela Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org * Juan Quintela (quintela@redhat.com) wrote: > "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" wrote: > > * Juan Quintela (quintela@redhat.com) wrote: > >> We change the meaning of start to be the offset from the beggining of > >> the block. > > > > s/beggining/beginning/ > > > > Why do this? > > We have: > > migration_bitmap_sync (all blocks) > > migration_bitmap_sync_range - called per block > > cpu_physical_memory_sync_dirty_bitmap > > > > Why keep migration_bitmap_sync_range having start/length as well as the block > > if you could just rename it to migration_bitmap_sync_block and just give it the rb? > > And since cpu_physical_memory_clear_dirty_range is lower level, why give it > > the rb? > > I did it on the previous series, then I remembered that I was not going > to be able to sync only part of the range, as I will want in the future. > > If you preffer as an intermediate meassure to just move to blocks, I can > do, but change is really small and not sure if it makes sense. OK then, but just comment it to say you want to. I'm still not sure if cpu_physical_memory_clear_dirty_range should have the RB; it feels that it's lower level, kvm stuff rather than things that know about RAMBlocks. Dave > > Later, Juan. -- Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilbert@redhat.com / Manchester, UK