From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53391) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YcUlz-00059j-7k for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 30 Mar 2015 04:10:16 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YcUlv-0004is-2Y for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 30 Mar 2015 04:10:15 -0400 Received: from mail-wg0-x229.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c00::229]:34244) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YcUlu-0004ic-T0 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 30 Mar 2015 04:10:11 -0400 Received: by wgbdm7 with SMTP id dm7so57779461wgb.1 for ; Mon, 30 Mar 2015 01:10:09 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Paolo Bonzini Message-ID: <551904DD.4080802@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2015 10:10:05 +0200 From: Paolo Bonzini MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1424883128-9841-1-git-send-email-dgilbert@redhat.com> <1424883128-9841-21-git-send-email-dgilbert@redhat.com> <20150313010058.GZ11973@voom.redhat.com> <20150313101953.GA2486@work-vm> <20150316061840.GE5741@voom.redhat.com> <20150320123759.GE2468@work-vm> <20150323022542.GG25043@voom.fritz.box> <20150324200414.GG2332@work-vm> <20150324223227.GK25043@voom.fritz.box> In-Reply-To: <20150324223227.GK25043@voom.fritz.box> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v5 20/45] Modify savevm handlers for postcopy List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: David Gibson , "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" Cc: aarcange@redhat.com, yamahata@private.email.ne.jp, quintela@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, amit.shah@redhat.com, yanghy@cn.fujitsu.com On 24/03/2015 23:32, David Gibson wrote: >>> OK, that one I prefer. Are you OK with: >>> qemu_savevm_state_complete_precopy calls -> >>> save_live_complete_precopy >>> >>> qemu_savevm_state_complete_postcopy calls -> >>> save_live_complete_postcopy >>> >>> ? > Sounds ok to me. Fwiw, I was thinking that both the > complete_precopy and complete_postcopy hooks should always be > called. For a non-postcopy migration, the postcopy hooks would > just be called immediately after the precopy hooks. What about then calling them save_live_after_precopy and save_live_complete, or having save_live_before_postcopy and save_live_complete? Paolo