On 2011-06-19 22:46, Cam Macdonell wrote: > On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 2:39 PM, Jan Kiszka <jan.kis...@web.de> wrote: >> On 2011-06-09 22:00, Anthony Liguori wrote: >>> On 06/09/2011 11:44 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote: >>>> A first step towards getting rid of register_device_unmigratable >>>> (ivshmem and lacking vmstate support in virtio are blocking this): >>>> >>>> Allow to register an unmigratable vmstate via qdev, i.e. tag a device >>>> declaratively. >>> >>> I thought part of the problem with this was that for some devices (like >>> ivshmem), whether it can be migrated was dynamic. It depends on >>> configuration, state, etc. >> >> That only applies to ivshmem (the other user is device assignment which >> is unconditionally unmigratable). And the ivshmem issue could easily be >> solved by defining two devices, ivshmem-peer (or just ivshmem) and >> ivshmem-master, eliminating the need for the role property. >> >> I don't think there will ever be a use case for a "transformer" device >> that becomes unmigratable during runtime (would be a nightmare for >> management apps anyway). >> >> If breaking the user interface of ivshmem for this is OK, I'll post a patch. >> >> Jan >> >> > > The migratability of ivshmem is not dynamic in that it doesn't change > at runtime, it's set when the device is created, either role=peer or > role=master is specified. So iiuc, this could work with ivshmem.
So you are fine with breaking the interface? Everyone else as well? Then I'll cook a patch to sort at least this out for 0.15. Jan -- Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT T DE IT 1 Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux
