On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 02:35:01PM +0800, huang...@chinatelecom.cn wrote: > From: Hyman Huang(黄勇) <huang...@chinatelecom.cn> > > Introduce "vcpu-dirtylimit-period" migration parameters, > which is used to makes dirtyrate calculation period
make > configurable. > > To implement that, refactor vcpu_dirty_rate_stat_collect > so that period can be configured instead of hardcode. hardcoded > > Meanwhile, introduce migrate_dirtylimit function to help > check if dirtylimit enabled during live migration, set > it false by default. > > Signed-off-by: Hyman Huang(黄勇) <huang...@chinatelecom.cn> > --- Focusing just on UI... > +++ b/qapi/migration.json > @@ -760,6 +760,9 @@ > # block device name if there is one, and to their > node name > # otherwise. (Since 5.2) > # > +# @vcpu-dirtylimit-period: Periodic time (ms) of dirtylimit during live > migration. > +# Defaults to 500ms. (Since 7.0) The next release is 7.1. You'll need to fix this and all other references. Do we want 'dirty-limit' instead of 'dirtylimit'? There was a recent thread on how to translate QAPI to other languages that are a bit more insistent on MixedCase, where properly separating English words makes it easier to translate to the expected case. > ## > # @migrate-set-parameters: > @@ -1125,6 +1132,9 @@ > # block device name if there is one, and to their > node name > # otherwise. (Since 5.2) > # > +# @vcpu-dirtylimit-period: Periodic time (ms) of dirtylimit during live > migration. > +# Defaults to 500ms. (Since 7.0) > +# > # Features: > # @unstable: Member @x-checkpoint-delay is experimental. Is this feature ready for prime time, or do we want to initially name it x-vcpu-dirty[-]limit-period to mark it experimental? -- Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. +1-919-301-3266 Virtualization: qemu.org | libvirt.org