From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:48932) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dDVi6-0005YS-8X for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 24 May 2017 08:48:19 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dDVi3-0002Zy-59 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 24 May 2017 08:48:18 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:57468) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dDVi2-0002ZQ-Ul for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 24 May 2017 08:48:15 -0400 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8D10A624DD for ; Wed, 24 May 2017 12:48:13 +0000 (UTC) From: Markus Armbruster References: <20170518111837.29212-1-quintela@redhat.com> <20170518111837.29212-4-quintela@redhat.com> <8760gxce1f.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> Date: Wed, 24 May 2017 14:48:07 +0200 In-Reply-To: <8760gxce1f.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> (Markus Armbruster's message of "Fri, 19 May 2017 12:54:36 +0200") Message-ID: <8737buo1yw.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/5] migration: Remove use of old MigrationParams List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Juan Quintela Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, lvivier@redhat.com, dgilbert@redhat.com, peterx@redhat.com Markus Armbruster writes: > Juan Quintela writes: > >> We have change in the previous patch to use migration capabilities for >> it. Notice that we continue using the old command line flags from >> migrate command from the time being. Remove the set_params method as >> now it is empty. >> >> For savevm, one can't do a: >> >> savevm -b/-i foo > > Yes (savem has no such options). > >> but now one can do: >> >> migrate_set_capability block on >> savevm foo >> >> And we can't use block migration. We could disable block capability >> unconditionally, but it would not be much better. > > This leaves me confused: what does the example do? Reading ahead... > looks like it fails with "Block migration and snapshots are > incompatible". What are you trying to say here? I think I now get what you're trying to say, but only because I've picked up enough context. Let me try to rephrase: migration: Use new configuration instead of old MigrationParams The previous commit introduced a MigrationCapability and a MigrationParameter for block migration. Use them instead of the old MigrationParams. Take care to reject attempts to combine block migration with snapshots, e.g. like this: migrate_set_capability block on savevm foo >> Signed-off-by: Juan Quintela >> Reviewed-by: Eric Blake > > Patch looks good to me. Preferably with a commit message I can still understand three weeks from now: Reviewed-by: Markus Armbruster