On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 14:35:05 +1000 David Gibson <da...@gibson.dropbear.id.au> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 12:56:26AM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 05:54:31PM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote: > > > Series fixes migration issues caused by unstable cpu_index which depended > > > on order cpus were created/destroyed. It follows David's idea to make > > > cpu_index assignable by selected boards if board supports cpu-hotplug > > > with device_add and needs stable cpu_index/'migration id' but leaves > > > behaviour of the same as before for users that don't care about > > > cpu-hot(un)plug making changes low-risk. > > > > > > tested with: > > > SRC -snapshot -enable-kvm -smp 1,maxcpus=3 -m 256M guest.img -monitor > > > stdio \ > > > -device qemu64-x86_64-cpu,id=cpudel,apic-id=1 \ > > > -device qemu64-x86_64-cpu,apic-id=2 > > > (qemu) device_del cpudel > > > (qemu) stop > > > (qemu) migrate "exec:gzip -c > STATEFILE.gz" > > > > > > DST -snapshot -enable-kvm -smp 1,maxcpus=3 -m 256M guest.img -monitor > > > stdio \ > > > -device qemu64-x86_64-cpu,apic-id=2 \ > > > -incoming "exec: gzip -c -d STATEFILE.gz" > > > > > > git tree to test with: > > > https://github.com/imammedo/qemu cpu-index-stable > > > to view > > > https://github.com/imammedo/qemu/commits/cpu-index-stable > > > > For PC bits: > > > > Reviewed-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com> > > > > This would be nice to have in 2.7. > > I agree. Despite the lateness, I think this will avoid substantial > future pain. > > > Who's reviewing/merging the rest? Eduardo? > > I've reviewed. I could merge through my tree if we don't have a > better option, but merging pc specific pieces through the ppc tree > would seem odd. Eduardo, if you take it through your tree could you drop spapr patches for now, it looks like PPC side are going to redefine core-id semantics so they'll post patches on top of this series.
