[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [libvirt] [PATCH v1 00/11] Rework storage migration



On 27.11.2012 22:42, Eric Blake wrote:
>> This patch set re-implements migration with storage for enough new
>> qemu.
> 
> How does this series interact with Li Guang's efforts to add offline
> migration?  In particular,

I guess you mean [1] more precisely, right? Although, event the origin
offline migration patch [2] does something similar like I am doing in
2/11: propagating 'unsigned long flags' deeper in the stack of functions
to make some decisions. But that's not what are you asking later, so
ignore this comment :)

> 
>> 1)  src -> dest: (QEMU_MIGRATION_PHASE_BEGIN3 ->
>> QEMU_MIGRATION_PHASE_PREPARE)
>>     <nbd>
>>        <disk src='/var/lib/libvirt/images/f17.img'
>>        size='17179869184'/>
>>     </nbd>
> 
> Both sets of patches need to pass size information across in the
> cookies; so is tying it to <nbd> appropriate, or should we be
> rethinking this XML to be shared between both patches?
> 

I've commented his patch [1] yesterday. We need the same piece of
functionality. Actually, my migration cookie is just a superset of his
(because I do need the port attribute as pointed out in comment to
6/11). However, I am not hesitating to rename it.
But from a quick look at his patch - we seem to implement the same
thing, more or less. His patch allows us to pre-create images for older
qemu which doesn't support nbd-server-* yet. But who is using such
ancient qemu? :)


1: https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2012-November/msg01022.html

2: https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2012-November/msg00886.html


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]