On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 05:35:44PM +0000, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: > * Peter Xu (pet...@redhat.com) wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 08:21:43PM +0300, Andrey Gruzdev wrote: > > > > For the long term I think we'd better have a helper: > > > > > > > > qemu_put_qio_channel_buffer(QEMUFile *file, QIOChannelBuffer > > > > *bioc) > > > > > > > > So as to hide this flush operation, which is tricky. We'll have two > > > > users so > > > > far: > > > > > > > > bg_migration_completion > > > > colo_do_checkpoint_transaction > > > > > > > > IMHO it'll be nicer if you'd do it in this patch altogether! > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > Sorry, can't get the idea, what's wrong with the fix. > > > > I'm fine with the fix, but I've got one patch attached just to show what I > > meant, so without any testing for sure.. > > > > Looks more complicated than I thought, but again I think we should hide that > > buffer flush into another helper to avoid overlooking it. > > I was wondering if I was missing the same fflush in postcopy, but I > don't *think* so, although it's a bit round about; before sending the > data I call: > > qemu_savevm_send_postcopy_run(fb) > > and that calls qemu_savevm_command_send that ends in a fflish; which is > non-obvious. > > While I'd leave that in there, it might be good to use that same thing.
Right, I was grepping qemu_put_buffer() previously, so as to easily got qemu_savevm_send_packaged() overlooked.. Maybe I can make it a small patch series after the snapshot fixes got in. Thanks, -- Peter Xu
