On 10/28/2012 10:35 AM, Orit Wasserman wrote:
On 10/26/2012 01:39 PM, Juan Quintela wrote:
Orit Wasserman owass...@redhat.com wrote:
On 10/18/2012 09:30 AM, Juan Quintela wrote:
Instead of testing each page individually, we search what is the next
dirty page with a bitmap operation. We have
Orit Wasserman owass...@redhat.com wrote:
If we are in iterate state this means the bitmap is changing all the time,
even when we didn't finish a complete cycle (for example we get to
the bandwidth limit, exit ram_save_iterate and sync the bitmap in
pending).
This means that bits in part of
On 10/26/2012 01:39 PM, Juan Quintela wrote:
Orit Wasserman owass...@redhat.com wrote:
On 10/18/2012 09:30 AM, Juan Quintela wrote:
Instead of testing each page individually, we search what is the next
dirty page with a bitmap operation. We have to reorganize the code to
move from a for
Orit Wasserman owass...@redhat.com wrote:
On 10/18/2012 09:30 AM, Juan Quintela wrote:
Instead of testing each page individually, we search what is the next
dirty page with a bitmap operation. We have to reorganize the code to
move from a for loop, to a while(dirty) loop.
-do {
+
On 10/18/2012 09:30 AM, Juan Quintela wrote:
Instead of testing each page individually, we search what is the next
dirty page with a bitmap operation. We have to reorganize the code to
move from a for loop, to a while(dirty) loop.
Signed-off-by: Juan Quintela quint...@redhat.com
---
Instead of testing each page individually, we search what is the next
dirty page with a bitmap operation. We have to reorganize the code to
move from a for loop, to a while(dirty) loop.
Signed-off-by: Juan Quintela quint...@redhat.com
---
arch_init.c | 45
