On 05/29/2013 04:31 PM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 02:32:50PM +0200, Julian Stecklina wrote:
>> On 05/28/2013 07:00 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>>> We aren't going to support any interface that enables out of tree
>>> devices.  This is just plugins in a different form with even more
>>> downsides.  You cannot easily keep track of dirty info, the guest
>>> physical address translation to host is difficult to keep in sync
>>> (imagine the complexity of memory hotplug).
>>
>> Is there a document describing the current qemu VM migration process,
>> especially the dirty page tracking, except the code?
>>
>> As a side note: The downsides of a naive approach are about that of PCI
>> passtrough devices with the opportunity to fix them later on. That being
>> said, I can live with this not being included in mainline qemu.
> 
> Asking for documentation and in the next paragraph stating you don't
> mind keeping patches out-of-tree...
> 
> The QEMU community exists because people are willing to contribute.  If
> you intend to only "take" and not "give", then you'll find that people
> gradually stop responding to your emails.

I am not saying that this will be closed in any way. I'll create a
github repo once I have to show something. If there is interest in
getting this into mainline qemu, then why not. Currently, it seems that
there is a categorical rejection of such functionality.

But this discussion is moot until there is working code. ;)

Julian