On 11/13/14, 11:03 AM, "Eric Blake" wrote:
>On 11/13/2014 09:44 AM, Gary Hook wrote:
>
>[metacomment]
>
>> On 11/13/14, 6:46 AM, "Markus Armbruster"
>>mailto:arm...@redhat.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Stefan Hajnoczi mailto:stefa...@gmail
On 11/13/14, 6:46 AM, "Markus Armbruster"
mailto:arm...@redhat.com>> wrote:
Stefan Hajnoczi mailto:stefa...@gmail.com>> writes:
On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 06:48:18PM +, Gary Hook wrote:
-return qemu_ftell(f) - last_ftell;
+delta_ftell = qemu_ftell(f) - l
On 11/13/14, 5:20 AM, "Stefan Hajnoczi"
mailto:stefa...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 06:48:18PM +, Gary Hook wrote:
-return qemu_ftell(f) - last_ftell;
+delta_ftell = qemu_ftell(f) - last_ftell;
+return( (delta_ftell > 0) ? 1 : (delta_ftell <
The function uses a ternary return value (<, >, == 0) defined as an int. The
code in in this function uses int64_t types to collect ftell() return values
and use their difference as the return value. Unfortunately, narrowing of
integer types results in the disposal of the left-most bits that won
This patch rectifies the mismatch between the expected return value of
block_save iterate() and the errant computation within the function.
On 10/30/14, 7:26 AM, "Amit Shah" wrote:
>On (Thu) 16 Oct 2014 [08:53:52], Dr. David Alan Gilbert (git) wrote:
>> From: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert"
>>
>> The migration code now occupies a fair chunk of the top level .c
>> files, it seems time to give it it's own directory.
>
>s/it's/its
6 out o
On 10/30/14, 5:03 AM, "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" wrote:
>* Gary Hook (gary.h...@nimboxx.com) wrote:
>> *Knock* *knock* *knock* Is this thing on?
>
>Yes - but only by luck did I notice this; it's normally better
>to reply to the thread that posted a patch and cc
On 10/30/14, 3:08 PM, "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" wrote:
>>I posted another thread asking about migration failure due to a copy
>> taking too long, but got no traction. In the case where the problem
>>raises
>> its head we have turned tunneling on. A tiny VM (<2GB in size) migrates
>> fine using t
*Knock* *knock* *knock* Is this thing on?
I applied the 47 pieces of the recent postcopy patch to 2.1.2 and am
poking around. An attempt to migrate results in a NULL pointer dereference
in savevm.c. Here is info from gdb:
Most of qemu_savevm_state_pending() succeeds, until it gets to the end.
He
On 10/27/14, 7:41 AM, "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" wrote:
>It should be possible to postcopy block storage as well, if that's
>the question (it might take some work to make sure that they play
>nicely together; e.g. wanting to making the page transfer higher
>priority than block transfer).
>However,
I see this went by:
Il 07/10/2014 12:29, Dr. David Alan Gilbert ha scritto:
> You mean something like this (untested) ?
>
> if (mis->postcopy_ram_state != POSTCOPY_RAM_INCOMING_NONE) {
> if (mis->postcopy_ram_state == POSTCOPY_RAM_INCOMING_ADVISE) {
> /*
>* Where a mi
11 matches
Mail list logo
