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
