Il 19/03/2013 19:40, Paolo Bonzini ha scritto: >>> >> That however gives me an idea... Instead of the full drain at the end >>> >> of an iteration, does it make sense to do a "partial" drain at every >>> >> chunk full, so that you don't have > N bytes pending and the downtime is >>> >> correspondingly limited? >> > >> > >> > Sure, you could do that, but it seems overly complex just to avoid >> > a single flush() call at the end of each iteration, right? > Would it really be that complex? Not having an extra QEMUFile op > perhaps balances that complexity (and the complexity remains hidden in > rdma.c, which is an advantage). > > You could alternatively drain every N megabytes sent, or something like > that. But a partial drain would help obeying the maximum downtime > limitations.
On second thought: just keep the drain operation, but make it clear that it is related to the new save_ram_page QEMUFileOps field. You could call it flush_ram_pages or something like that. Paolo
