Laurent Vivier <lviv...@redhat.com> wrote: > On 06/02/2019 18:58, Juan Quintela wrote: >> Laurent Vivier <lviv...@redhat.com> wrote: >>> On 06/02/2019 14:23, Juan Quintela wrote: >>>> Libvirt don't want to expose (and explain it). And testing looks like >>>> 128 is good for all use cases, so just drop it. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Juan Quintela <quint...@redhat.com> >>>> --- >>>> hmp.c | 7 ------- >>>> migration/migration.c | 30 ------------------------------ >>>> migration/migration.h | 1 - >>>> migration/ram.c | 13 ++++++++----- >>>> qapi/migration.json | 13 +------------ >>>> 5 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 55 deletions(-) >>>> >>> ... >>>> diff --git a/migration/migration.c b/migration/migration.c >>>> index f673486679..65df9b566e 100644 >>>> --- a/migration/migration.c >>>> +++ b/migration/migration.c >>>> @@ -81,7 +81,6 @@ >>>> /* The delay time (in ms) between two COLO checkpoints */ >>>> #define DEFAULT_MIGRATE_X_CHECKPOINT_DELAY (200 * 100) >>>> #define DEFAULT_MIGRATE_MULTIFD_CHANNELS 2 >>>> -#define DEFAULT_MIGRATE_MULTIFD_PAGE_COUNT 128 >>> >>> Why do you update it in the previous patch to remove it in this one? >> >> To make clear that I change the default. Otherwise it gets hidden into >> the whole patch. if you preffer I could have done the other way around. > > OK, I understand. It's not really clear because the new default > (MULTIFD_PAGE_COUNT) is hidden in the patch. > > Moreover, in the first patch you update the value, but you don't update > the comments in qapi/migration.json (I've seen that because you remove > them in this patch).
Aha, I knew I was forgetting something. > Perhaps you can proceed in the reverse order: remove the parameter and > then set the new default... or merge the two patches and saying in the > commit message you change the default value. Ok. > Thanks, > Laurent Later, Juan.
