On 20/11/14 18:28, Andrew Cooper wrote:
1) Freeze the guests p2m during live migrate
2) Deep p2m dirty tracking
3) Eagerly check for p2m structure changes.
4) Request p2m structure change updates from the guest
Proposed solution: A combination of 2, 3 and 4.
Option 5: don't change
At 10:54 + on 21 Nov (1416563695), Andrew Cooper wrote:
On 21/11/14 10:43, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 20.11.14 at 19:28, andrew.coop...@citrix.com wrote:
Should the guest change the p2m structure during live migration, the
toolstack ends up with a stale p2m with a non-p2m frame in the
At 10:32 + on 21 Nov (1416562351), Andrew Cooper wrote:
On 21/11/14 05:41, Juergen Gross wrote:
On 11/20/2014 07:28 PM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
Hello,
Tim, David and I were discussing this over lunch. This email is a
(hopefully accurate) account of our findings, and potential
On 27/11/14 15:00, Tim Deegan wrote:
At 10:54 + on 21 Nov (1416563695), Andrew Cooper wrote:
On 21/11/14 10:43, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 20.11.14 at 19:28, andrew.coop...@citrix.com wrote:
Should the guest change the p2m structure during live migration, the
toolstack ends up with a stale p2m
At 15:16 + on 27 Nov (1417097812), Andrew Cooper wrote:
On 27/11/14 15:00, Tim Deegan wrote:
At 10:54 + on 21 Nov (1416563695), Andrew Cooper wrote:
On 21/11/14 10:43, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 20.11.14 at 19:28, andrew.coop...@citrix.com wrote:
Should the guest change the p2m
On 27/11/14 15:28, Tim Deegan wrote:
At 15:16 + on 27 Nov (1417097812), Andrew Cooper wrote:
On 27/11/14 15:00, Tim Deegan wrote:
At 10:54 + on 21 Nov (1416563695), Andrew Cooper wrote:
On 21/11/14 10:43, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 20.11.14 at 19:28, andrew.coop...@citrix.com wrote:
On Thu, 2014-11-20 at 18:28 +, Andrew Cooper wrote:
Realistically, this means no updates to the
p2m at all, due to several potential race conditions.
From the rest of the mail it seems as if you are talking primarily about
changes to the p2m *structure*, i.e. which guest frames contain the
On 20.11.14 at 19:28, andrew.coop...@citrix.com wrote:
Should the guest change the p2m structure during live migration, the
toolstack ends up with a stale p2m with a non-p2m frame in the middle,
resulting in bogus cross-referencing. Should the guest change an entry
in the p2m, the p2m frame
On 21/11/14 10:43, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 20.11.14 at 19:28, andrew.coop...@citrix.com wrote:
Should the guest change the p2m structure during live migration, the
toolstack ends up with a stale p2m with a non-p2m frame in the middle,
resulting in bogus cross-referencing. Should the guest
On 21/11/14 10:46, Ian Campbell wrote:
On Fri, 2014-11-21 at 10:24 +, Andrew Cooper wrote:
On 21/11/14 09:43, Ian Campbell wrote:
I don't see any (explicit) mention of the pfn_to_mfn_frame_list_list
here, where does that fit in?
It is referenced several times, although not by its exact
On Fri, 2014-11-21 at 11:07 +, Andrew Cooper wrote:
On 21/11/14 10:46, Ian Campbell wrote:
On Fri, 2014-11-21 at 10:24 +, Andrew Cooper wrote:
On 21/11/14 09:43, Ian Campbell wrote:
I don't see any (explicit) mention of the pfn_to_mfn_frame_list_list
here, where does that fit in?
On 11/21/2014 12:15 PM, Ian Campbell wrote:
On Fri, 2014-11-21 at 11:07 +, Andrew Cooper wrote:
On 21/11/14 10:46, Ian Campbell wrote:
On Fri, 2014-11-21 at 10:24 +, Andrew Cooper wrote:
On 21/11/14 09:43, Ian Campbell wrote:
I don't see any (explicit) mention of the
On Fri, 2014-11-21 at 12:20 +0100, Juergen Gross wrote:
On 11/21/2014 12:15 PM, Ian Campbell wrote:
On Fri, 2014-11-21 at 11:07 +, Andrew Cooper wrote:
On 21/11/14 10:46, Ian Campbell wrote:
On Fri, 2014-11-21 at 10:24 +, Andrew Cooper wrote:
On 21/11/14 09:43, Ian Campbell wrote:
Hello,
Tim, David and I were discussing this over lunch. This email is a
(hopefully accurate) account of our findings, and potential solutions.
(If I have messed up, please shout.)
Currently, correct live migration of PV domains relies on the toolstack
(which has a live mapping of the guests
14 matches
Mail list logo
