On Fri, May 26, 2023 at 5:04 AM Juan Quintela <quint...@redhat.com> wrote: > > Leonardo Brás <leob...@redhat.com> wrote: > > On Mon, 2023-05-15 at 21:56 +0200, Juan Quintela wrote: > >> We forget several places to add to trasferred amount of data. With > >> this fixes I get: > >> > >> qemu_file_transferred() + multifd_bytes == transferred > >> > >> The only place whrer this is not true is during devices sending. But > >> going all through the full tree searching for devices that use > >> QEMUFile directly is a bit too much. > >> > >> Multifd, precopy and xbzrle work as expected. Postocpy still misses 35 > >> bytes, but searching for them is getting complicated, so I stop here. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Juan Quintela <quint...@redhat.com> > >> --- > >> migration/ram.c | 14 ++++++++++++++ > >> migration/savevm.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++-- > >> migration/vmstate.c | 3 +++ > >> migration/meson.build | 2 +- > >> 4 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/migration/ram.c b/migration/ram.c > >> index f69d8d42b0..fd5a8db0f8 100644 > >> --- a/migration/ram.c > >> +++ b/migration/ram.c > >> @@ -337,6 +337,7 @@ int64_t ramblock_recv_bitmap_send(QEMUFile *file, > >> > >> g_free(le_bitmap); > >> > >> + stat64_add(&mig_stats.transferred, 8 + size + 8); > >> if (qemu_file_get_error(file)) { > >> return qemu_file_get_error(file); > >> } > >> @@ -1392,6 +1393,7 @@ static int find_dirty_block(RAMState *rs, > >> PageSearchStatus *pss) > >> return ret; > >> } > >> qemu_put_be64(f, RAM_SAVE_FLAG_MULTIFD_FLUSH); > >> + stat64_add(&mig_stats.transferred, 8); > >> qemu_fflush(f); > >> } > >> /* > >> @@ -3020,6 +3022,7 @@ static int ram_save_setup(QEMUFile *f, void *opaque) > >> RAMState **rsp = opaque; > >> RAMBlock *block; > >> int ret; > >> + size_t size = 0; > >> > >> if (compress_threads_save_setup()) { > >> return -1; > >> @@ -3038,16 +3041,20 @@ static int ram_save_setup(QEMUFile *f, void > >> *opaque) > >> qemu_put_be64(f, ram_bytes_total_with_ignored() > >> | RAM_SAVE_FLAG_MEM_SIZE); > >> > >> + size += 8; > >> RAMBLOCK_FOREACH_MIGRATABLE(block) { > >> qemu_put_byte(f, strlen(block->idstr)); > >> qemu_put_buffer(f, (uint8_t *)block->idstr, > >> strlen(block->idstr)); > >> qemu_put_be64(f, block->used_length); > >> + size += 1 + strlen(block->idstr) + 8; > > > > I was thinking some of them would look better with sizeof()s instead of > > given > > literal number, such as: > > > > size += sizeof(Byte) + strlen(block->idstr) + sizeof(block->used_length); > > > > Maybe too much? > > I dropped this patch for two reasons: > > - reviewers gave me a bad time with it O:-) > - it was there only so if anyone was meassuring that new counters are > the same that old counters. > > But as I have already checked that, we don't need it. > > I drop it on the next round that I send. > > Maybe, it would be nice to have qemu_put_* to return the value, and in this > > case: > > > > size += qemu_put_be64(...) > > > > What do you think? > > Even more important than that is to return an error value, but that > is a very long project. > > See on my next series that qemu_fflush() return errors, so code gets > simplifed: > > qemu_fflush(file); > if (qemu_file_get_error(file)) { > handle error; > } > > to: > > qemu_fflush(file); > if (qemu_file_get_error(file)) { > handle error; > } >
They look the same to me, what changed? > We need to do basically all qemu_put_*() and qemu_get_*() functions, but > it is a step on the right direction. > > Later, Juan. >