Not a reply to the patch but a general observation. I noticed that the tcp migration uses gethostname (or getaddrinfo after this patch) from the main thread - is it really the way to go? Note that DNS query which is done may block for a large amount of time. Is it really safe in this context? Should it resolve the name in a separate thread, allowing guest to run while it is doing that?
This question is important for me because right now I'm evaluating a network-connected block device driver which should do failover, so it will have to resolve alternative name(s) at runtime (especially since list of available targets is dynamic). >From one point, _usually_, the delay there is very small since it is unlikely you'll do migration or failover overseas, so most likely you'll have the answer from DNS handy. But from another point, if the DNS is malfunctioning right at that time (eg, one of the two DNS resolvers is being rebooted), the delay even from local DNS may be noticeable. Thanks, /mjt -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
