On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 05:52:53AM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote: > > From: Kirti Wankhede [mailto:kwankh...@nvidia.com] > > Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2019 1:25 PM > > > > On 2/20/2019 3:52 PM, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: > > > * Kirti Wankhede (kwankh...@nvidia.com) wrote: > > >> Add migration support for VFIO device > > > > > > Hi Kirti, > > > Can you explain how this compares and works with Yan Zhao's > > > set? > > > > This patch set is incremental version of my previous patch set: > > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/cover/1000719/ > > This takes care of the feedbacks received on previous version. > > > > This patch set is different than Yan Zhao's set. > > > > I can help give some background about Yan's work: > > There was a big gap between Kirti's last version and the overall review > comments, especially this one: > https://www.mail-archive.com/qemu-devel@nongnu.org/msg576652.html
Hi Kevin, > > Then there was no reply from Kirti whether she agreed with the comments > and was working on a new version. Sorry, we should ack on those comments when we have received them last time. > > Then we think we should jump in to keep the ball moving, based on > a fresh implementation according to recommended direction, i.e. focusing > on device state management instead of sticking to migration flow in kernel > API design. > > and also more importantly we provided kernel side implementation based > on Intel GVT-g to give the whole picture of both user/kernel side changes. > That should give people a better understanding of how those new APIs > are expected to be used by Qemu, and to be implemented by vendor driver. > > That is why Yan just shared her work. Really glad to see the v2 version works for you guys, appreciate for the driver side changes. > > Now it's great to see that Kirti is still actively working on this effort and > is > also moving toward the right direction. Let's have a close look at two > implementations and then choose a cleaner one as base for future > enhancements. :-) Yes, the v3 has addressed all the comments / concerns raised in the v2, I think we should take a look and keep moving. Just a quick thought - would be possible / better to have Kirti focus on the QEMU patches and Yan take care GVT-g kernel driver side changes? This will give us the best testing coverage. Hope I don't step on anybody's toes here. ;-) Thanks, Neo > > Thanks > Kevin
