On (Wed) 16 Feb 2011 [08:41:27], Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 02/16/2011 08:39 AM, Amit Shah wrote:
> >On (Tue) 15 Feb 2011 [17:13:13], Anthony Liguori wrote:
> >>On 02/15/2011 10:26 AM, Chris Wright wrote:
> >>>revisit new -> old migration
> >>>- Amit offers virtio-serial patches and some legwork
> >>So, to me, migration correctness trumps compatibility. I don't
> >>think compatibility is useful if it means that a guest may fail
> >>during migration. We have subsections as a way to support the cases
> >>where it's safe to migrate to an old version only if a feature is
> >>not being used or a corner case is not currently happening. This is
> >>the best way to approach the problem.
> >>
> >>If a subsection won't work, that means you want to migrate when
> >>you're completely sure that migrating will break a guest. That
> >>doesn't seem reasonable at all to me.
> >>
> >>I think in the last discussion on Amit's patches, I had suggested
> >>that subsections could be used to allow migration when there wasn't
> >>any queued data. I think this is the best we can do while
> >>preserving correctness.
> >The only problem is that virtio hasn't been converted over to vmstate,
> >which is necessary for subsections.
>
> Then it needs to be converted.
But that can't be done for 0.14.
Amit
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
