On Wed, 28 Apr 2021 12:29:30 -0400
Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 27, 2021 at 04:48:48PM -0400, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 03:33:32PM -0500, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> > > It is not safe to pretend that emulated NVDIMM supports
> > > persistence while backend actually
On Tue, Apr 27, 2021 at 04:48:48PM -0400, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 03:33:32PM -0500, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> > It is not safe to pretend that emulated NVDIMM supports
> > persistence while backend actually failed to enable it
> > and used non-persistent mapping as fall back.
On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 03:33:32PM -0500, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> It is not safe to pretend that emulated NVDIMM supports
> persistence while backend actually failed to enable it
> and used non-persistent mapping as fall back.
> Instead of falling-back, QEMU should be more strict and
> error out
Cc'ing MST.
On 1/20/21 8:31 PM, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Jan 2021 15:33:32 -0500
> Igor Mammedov wrote:
>
>> It is not safe to pretend that emulated NVDIMM supports
>> persistence while backend actually failed to enable it
>> and used non-persistent mapping as fall back.
>> Instead of
On Mon, 11 Jan 2021 15:33:32 -0500
Igor Mammedov wrote:
> It is not safe to pretend that emulated NVDIMM supports
> persistence while backend actually failed to enable it
> and used non-persistent mapping as fall back.
> Instead of falling-back, QEMU should be more strict and
> error out with
It is not safe to pretend that emulated NVDIMM supports
persistence while backend actually failed to enable it
and used non-persistent mapping as fall back.
Instead of falling-back, QEMU should be more strict and
error out with clear message that it's not supported.
So if user asks for persistence
On Tue, 29 Dec 2020 19:04:58 +0100
Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> On 12/29/20 6:29 PM, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> > It is not safe to pretend that emulated NVDIMM supports
> > persistence while backend actually failed to enable it
> > and used non-persistent mapping as fall back.
> > Instead of
On 12/29/20 6:29 PM, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> It is not safe to pretend that emulated NVDIMM supports
> persistence while backend actually failed to enable it
> and used non-persistent mapping as fall back.
> Instead of falling-back, QEMU should be more strict and
> error out with clear message that
It is not safe to pretend that emulated NVDIMM supports
persistence while backend actually failed to enable it
and used non-persistent mapping as fall back.
Instead of falling-back, QEMU should be more strict and
error out with clear message that it's not supported.
So if user asks for persistence
