On 07/30/2018 01:06 PM, Michael Roth wrote:
> Quoting John Snow (2018-07-23 17:22:03)
>> This is an updated version of Vladimir's proposal for fixing the
>> handling around migration and persistent dirty bitmaps.
> 
> Are these still being considered for 3.0 rc3/rc4? 2.12.1 releases this week
> and I'm not sure how badly these are needed.
> 

Good question. I'd still LIKE them in 3.0, but further fixes are
actually still needed, and I'm working on this right now.

I think you'll find that you might have trouble applying them to 2.12.1
without a fairly long trail of prerequisites, so it might not be easily
plausible.

>>
>> Patches 1, 4, 6, and 7 update the testing for this feature.
>> Patch 2 touches up an error message.
>> Patch 3 removes dead code.
>> Patch 5 contains the real fix.
>>
>> v2:
>>  - Add a new patch 4 as a prerequisite for what's now patch 5
>>  - Rework the fix to be (hopefully) cleaner, see patch 5 notes
>>  - Adjust error message in patch 2 (Eric)
>>  - Adjust test logic slightly (patches 6, 7) to deal with changes
>>    in patch 5.
>>
>> John Snow (2):
>>   iotests: 169: actually test block migration
>>   dirty-bitmaps: clean-up bitmaps loading and migration logic
>>
>> Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy (5):
>>   iotests: 169: drop deprecated 'autoload' parameter
>>   block/qcow2: improve error message in qcow2_inactivate
>>   block/qcow2: drop dirty_bitmaps_loaded state variable
>>   iotests: improve 169
>>   iotests: 169: add cases for source vm resuming
>>
>>  block.c                        |  4 ---
>>  block/dirty-bitmap.c           | 20 ------------
>>  block/qcow2-bitmap.c           | 16 +++++++++
>>  block/qcow2.c                  | 26 ++++-----------
>>  block/qcow2.h                  |  1 -
>>  include/block/dirty-bitmap.h   |  2 +-
>>  migration/block-dirty-bitmap.c | 11 ++++---
>>  tests/qemu-iotests/169         | 74 
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>>  tests/qemu-iotests/169.out     |  4 +--
>>  9 files changed, 103 insertions(+), 55 deletions(-)
>>
>> -- 
>> 2.14.4
>>
>>


Reply via email to