* David Gibson (da...@gibson.dropbear.id.au) wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 10:19:54AM +0000, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> > * David Gibson (da...@gibson.dropbear.id.au) wrote:
> > > On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 04:51:43PM +0000, Dr. David Alan Gilbert (git)
> > > wrote:
> > > > From: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <dgilb...@redhat.com>
> > > >
> > > > Modify save_live_pending to return separate postcopiable and
> > > > non-postcopiable counts.
> > > >
> > > > Add 'can_postcopy' to allow a device to state if it can postcopy
> > >
> > > What's the purpose of the can_postcopy callback? There are no callers
> > > in this patch - is it still necessary with the change to
> > > save_live_pending?
> >
> > The patch 'qemu_savevm_state_complete: Postcopy changes' uses
> > it in qemu_savevm_state_postcopy_complete and qemu_savevm_state_complete
> > to decide which devices must be completed at that point.
>
> Couldn't they check for non-zero postcopiable state from
> save_live_pending instead?
That would be a bit weird.
At the moment for each device we call the:
save_live_setup method (from qemu_savevm_state_begin)
0...multiple times we call:
save_live_pending
save_live_iterate
and then we always call
save_live_complete
To my mind we have to call save_live_complete for any device
that we've called save_live_setup on (maybe it allocated something
in _setup that it clears up in _complete).
save_live_pending could perfectly well return 0 remaining at the end of
the migrate for our device, and thus if we used that then we wouldn't
call save_live_complete.
Dave
>
> --
> David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code
> david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_
> _other_
> | _way_ _around_!
> http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson
--
Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilb...@redhat.com / Manchester, UK
