Anthony Liguori <anth...@codemonkey.ws> wrote: > On 11/30/2010 01:15 PM, Juan Quintela wrote:
>>>> At the end of the ram_save_live(). This was the reason that I put the >>>> information there. >>>> >>>> for the 24mins stall (I don't have that machine anymore) I had less >>>> "exact" measurements. It was the amount that it "decided" to sent in >>>> the last non-live part of memory migration. With the stalls& zero page >>>> account, we just got to the point where we had basically infinity speed. >>>> >>>> >>> That's not quite guest visible. >>> >> Humm, guest don't answer in 24mins >> monitor don't answer in 24mins >> ping don't answer in 24mins >> >> are you sure that this is not visible? Bug report put that guest had >> just died, it was me who waited to see that it took 24mins to end. >> > > I'm extremely sceptical that any of your patches would address this > problem. Even if you had to scan every page in a 400GB guest, it > would not take 24 minutes. Something is not quite right here. > > 24 minutes suggests that there's another problem that is yet to be > identified. I haven't tested the lastest versions of the patches sent to the list, but a previous version fixed that problem. If I get my hands on the machine will try to reproduce the problem and measure things. Later, Juan.