On 22 January 2018 at 12:38, Dr. David Alan Gilbert <dgilb...@redhat.com> wrote:
> * Peter Maydell (peter.mayd...@linaro.org) wrote:
>> On 15 January 2018 at 11:52, Juan Quintela <quint...@redhat.com> wrote:
>> > Alexey Perevalov (6):
>> >       migration: introduce postcopy-blocktime capability
>> >       migration: add postcopy blocktime ctx into MigrationIncomingState
>> >       migration: calculate vCPU blocktime on dst side
>> >       migration: postcopy_blocktime documentation
>> >       migration: add blocktime calculation into migration-test
>> >       migration: add postcopy total blocktime into query-migrate
>>
>> I suggest that we should for the moment revert
>> 3be98be4e9f5  migration: calculate vCPU blocktime on dst side
>> 5f32dc8ee073  migration: add blocktime calculation into migration-test
>> ca6011c23291  migration: add postcopy total blocktime into query-migrate
>>
>> unless there is an imminent fix for the ppc32 issues (which seems
>> unlikely since the code is fundamentally assuming it can atomically
>> do operations which can't be done atomically on all hosts).
>>
>> I haven't yet tested that combination of reverts, I'm guessing
>> at which subsequent commits depend on 3be98be4e9f5. Let me know
>> if you have suggestions for additions/removals from the revert list.
>
> It's probably better to remove the whole set of 6, then we can come
> back to it later rather than leaving something half-implemented in
> there.

OK. I'm currently running a commit with
 git revert --no-commit 31bf06a9d6844d^..ca6011c232912
through my build tests, though I'll hold off on actually pushing it
for a bit to give people time to comment.

thanks
-- PMM

Reply via email to