From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Cooper Subject: Re: Migration v2 and related work for 4.6 Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2015 10:34:34 +0100 Message-ID: <551D0D2A.6030506@citrix.com> References: <551BD097.2030208@citrix.com> <1427965418.4037.6.camel@citrix.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1427965418.4037.6.camel@citrix.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: Ian Campbell Cc: Wei Liu , Wen Congyang , Vijay Kilari , Ian Jackson , Xen-devel List , Shriram Rajagopalan , Hongyang Yang List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 02/04/15 10:03, Ian Campbell wrote: > On Wed, 2015-04-01 at 12:03 +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote: >> I propose that the libxc series be accepted independently of the libxl >> series. > That is most likely a good idea IMHO. > > What do you estimate the chances of the libxl bit being done for 4.6 to > be? I hope to have everything complete for 4.6, including removal of the legacy code. Given the current timescales, I would say most likely. > > Is there an option of actually switching to the new libxc without > switching libxl and fixing libxl later, or would that be as much work as > just fixing libxl? For PV guests, yes. One can transparently swap the legacy algorithm from the v2 algorithm and every works. For HVM guests, no. The handling of the Qemu save record and toolstack records needs fixing. In the upgrade case, libxl also needs to take care of piping the legacy stream through the conversion script. ~Andrew