Re: [PATCH v7 00/21] Initial support for multi-process qemu

[Jag Raman <jag.raman@oracle.com>]

> On Jul 2, 2020, at 9:40 AM, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 10:09:22AM -0700, elena.ufimtseva@oracle.com wrote:
>> From: Elena Ufimtseva <elena.ufimtseva@oracle.com>
>> 
>> This is the v7 of the patchset.
> 
> I have completed the review and left comments on the patches.
> 
> I'm glad it was possible to simplify this feature. The overall approach

Hi Stefan,

We’re also with you on this. The feature looks much simpler now.

> makes sense to me and I see how it forms the base on which
> VFIO-over-socket and smaller remote program builds using Kconfig can be
> developed.
> 
> My main concern is that the object lifecycle has not been fully
> implemented in the proxy and remote device. Error handling is

Thank you for your feedback on. FWIW, we did check about the unrealize() path
in the object lifecycle management. We noticed that the destructor for the PCI
devices (pci_qdev_unrealize()) is currently not invoking the instance specific
destructor/unrealize functions. While this is not an excuse for not implementing
the unrealize functions, it currently doesn’t have an impact on the hot unplug path.

You’re correct, we should implement the unrealize/destructor for the Proxy & remote
objects. We’ll also look into any background for why the PCI devices don’t call
instance specific destructor.

> incomplete, resources are leaked, and hot unplug does not work. Thinking

We’ll double check the resource leak issues, specifically with respect to open
file destructors.

> through the lifecycle is very important so that additional work can
> build on top of this later. I have tried to point out these issues in
> the individual patches.

We got a chance to go over your feedback. We will send out responses to them
shortly.

Thank you very much!
--
Jag