On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 02:10:34PM +0800, Wei Yang wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 02:05:47PM +0800, Wei Yang wrote:
> >On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 01:40:13PM +0800, Peter Xu wrote:
> >>
> >>Ah I see, thanks for the pointer. Then I would agree it's fine.
> >>
> >>I'm not an expert of TCG - I'm curiou
On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 02:05:47PM +0800, Wei Yang wrote:
>On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 01:40:13PM +0800, Peter Xu wrote:
>>
>>Ah I see, thanks for the pointer. Then I would agree it's fine.
>>
>>I'm not an expert of TCG - I'm curious on why all those three dirty
>>bitmaps need to be set at the very be
On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 01:40:13PM +0800, Peter Xu wrote:
>
>Ah I see, thanks for the pointer. Then I would agree it's fine.
>
>I'm not an expert of TCG - I'm curious on why all those three dirty
>bitmaps need to be set at the very beginning. IIUC at least the VGA
>bitmap should not require that
On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 11:36:00AM +0800, Wei Yang wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 10:35:27AM +0800, Peter Xu wrote:
> >On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 09:33:05AM +0800, Wei Yang wrote:
> >> On Sat, Jun 01, 2019 at 11:34:41AM +0800, Peter Xu wrote:
> >> >On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 05:43:37PM +0100, Dr. David
On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 10:35:27AM +0800, Peter Xu wrote:
>On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 09:33:05AM +0800, Wei Yang wrote:
>> On Sat, Jun 01, 2019 at 11:34:41AM +0800, Peter Xu wrote:
>> >On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 05:43:37PM +0100, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
>> >> * Wei Yang (richardw.y...@linux.intel.c
On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 09:33:05AM +0800, Wei Yang wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 01, 2019 at 11:34:41AM +0800, Peter Xu wrote:
> >On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 05:43:37PM +0100, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> >> * Wei Yang (richardw.y...@linux.intel.com) wrote:
> >> > During migration, we would sync bitmap from
On Sat, Jun 01, 2019 at 11:34:41AM +0800, Peter Xu wrote:
>On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 05:43:37PM +0100, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
>> * Wei Yang (richardw.y...@linux.intel.com) wrote:
>> > During migration, we would sync bitmap from ram_list.dirty_memory to
>> > RAMBlock.bmap in cpu_physical_memory
On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 05:43:37PM +0100, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> * Wei Yang (richardw.y...@linux.intel.com) wrote:
> > During migration, we would sync bitmap from ram_list.dirty_memory to
> > RAMBlock.bmap in cpu_physical_memory_sync_dirty_bitmap().
> >
> > Since we set RAMBlock.bmap and
* Wei Yang (richardw.y...@linux.intel.com) wrote:
> During migration, we would sync bitmap from ram_list.dirty_memory to
> RAMBlock.bmap in cpu_physical_memory_sync_dirty_bitmap().
>
> Since we set RAMBlock.bmap and ram_list.dirty_memory both to all 1, this
> means at the first round this sync is
During migration, we would sync bitmap from ram_list.dirty_memory to
RAMBlock.bmap in cpu_physical_memory_sync_dirty_bitmap().
Since we set RAMBlock.bmap and ram_list.dirty_memory both to all 1, this
means at the first round this sync is meaningless and is a duplicated
work.
Leaving RAMBlock->bma
10 matches
Mail list logo
