On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 8:03 PM, Zhou Jie wrote:
> Hi, Alex
>
>
> On 2016/6/9 23:39, Alexander Duyck wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 3:14 AM, Zhou Jie
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> TO Alex
>>> TO Michael
>>>
>>>In your solution you add a emulate PCI bridge to act as
>>>a bridge between direct ass
Hi, Alex
On 2016/6/9 23:39, Alexander Duyck wrote:
On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 3:14 AM, Zhou Jie wrote:
TO Alex
TO Michael
In your solution you add a emulate PCI bridge to act as
a bridge between direct assigned devices and the host bridge.
Do you mean put all direct assigned devices to
On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 3:14 AM, Zhou Jie wrote:
> TO Alex
> TO Michael
>
>In your solution you add a emulate PCI bridge to act as
>a bridge between direct assigned devices and the host bridge.
>Do you mean put all direct assigned devices to
>one emulate PCI bridge?
>If yes, thi
TO Alex
TO Michael
In your solution you add a emulate PCI bridge to act as
a bridge between direct assigned devices and the host bridge.
Do you mean put all direct assigned devices to
one emulate PCI bridge?
If yes, this maybe bring some problems.
We are writing a patchset to s
On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 2:18 AM, Zhou Jie wrote:
> Hi Alex,
>
>
> On 2016/1/6 0:18, Alexander Duyck wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 1:40 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 07:11:25PM -0800, Alexander Duyck wrote:
>>
>> The two mechanisms referenced above woul
Hi Alex,
On 2016/1/6 0:18, Alexander Duyck wrote:
On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 1:40 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 07:11:25PM -0800, Alexander Duyck wrote:
The two mechanisms referenced above would likely require coordination with
QEMU and as such are open to discussion. I h
> You can create a dummy device in guest for the duration of migration.
> Use guest agent to move IP address there and that should be enough to trick
> most guests.
If you are doing this - why not bond the physical NIC with an virtual device
and unplug the physical NIC?
On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 1:40 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 07:11:25PM -0800, Alexander Duyck wrote:
>> >> The two mechanisms referenced above would likely require coordination with
>> >> QEMU and as such are open to discussion. I haven't attempted to address
>> >> them as
On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 12:43:03PM +, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> * Michael S. Tsirkin (m...@redhat.com) wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 10:45:25AM +, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> > > * Michael S. Tsirkin (m...@redhat.com) wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 10:01:04AM +, D
* Michael S. Tsirkin (m...@redhat.com) wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 10:45:25AM +, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> > * Michael S. Tsirkin (m...@redhat.com) wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 10:01:04AM +, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> > > > * Michael S. Tsirkin (m...@redhat.com) wrot
On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 11:03:38AM +, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> * Michael S. Tsirkin (m...@redhat.com) wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 10:45:25AM +, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> > > * Michael S. Tsirkin (m...@redhat.com) wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 10:01:04AM +, D
On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 12:59:54PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 10:45:25AM +, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> > * Michael S. Tsirkin (m...@redhat.com) wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 10:01:04AM +, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> > > > * Michael S. Tsirkin
On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 10:45:25AM +, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> * Michael S. Tsirkin (m...@redhat.com) wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 10:01:04AM +, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> > > * Michael S. Tsirkin (m...@redhat.com) wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 07:11:25PM -0800, A
* Michael S. Tsirkin (m...@redhat.com) wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 10:45:25AM +, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> > * Michael S. Tsirkin (m...@redhat.com) wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 10:01:04AM +, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> > > > * Michael S. Tsirkin (m...@redhat.com) wrot
On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 10:45:25AM +, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> * Michael S. Tsirkin (m...@redhat.com) wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 10:01:04AM +, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> > > * Michael S. Tsirkin (m...@redhat.com) wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 07:11:25PM -0800, A
* Michael S. Tsirkin (m...@redhat.com) wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 10:01:04AM +, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> > * Michael S. Tsirkin (m...@redhat.com) wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 07:11:25PM -0800, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> > > > >> The two mechanisms referenced above would likel
On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 10:01:04AM +, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> * Michael S. Tsirkin (m...@redhat.com) wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 07:11:25PM -0800, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> > > >> The two mechanisms referenced above would likely require coordination
> > > >> with
> > > >> QEMU an
* Michael S. Tsirkin (m...@redhat.com) wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 07:11:25PM -0800, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> > >> The two mechanisms referenced above would likely require coordination
> > >> with
> > >> QEMU and as such are open to discussion. I haven't attempted to address
> > >> them as I
On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 07:11:25PM -0800, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> >> The two mechanisms referenced above would likely require coordination with
> >> QEMU and as such are open to discussion. I haven't attempted to address
> >> them as I am not sure there is a consensus as of yet. My personal
> >>
On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 12:41 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 13, 2015 at 01:28:09PM -0800, Alexander Duyck wrote:
>> This patch set is meant to be the guest side code for a proof of concept
>> involving leaving pass-through devices in the guest during the warm-up
>> phase of guest l
On Sun, Dec 13, 2015 at 01:28:09PM -0800, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> This patch set is meant to be the guest side code for a proof of concept
> involving leaving pass-through devices in the guest during the warm-up
> phase of guest live migration. In order to accomplish this I have added a
What doe
This patch set is meant to be the guest side code for a proof of concept
involving leaving pass-through devices in the guest during the warm-up
phase of guest live migration. In order to accomplish this I have added a
new function called dma_mark_dirty that will mark the pages associated with
the
On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 03:20:26PM +0800, Yang Zhang wrote:
> On 2015/12/14 13:46, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> >On Sun, Dec 13, 2015 at 9:22 PM, Yang Zhang wrote:
> >>On 2015/12/14 12:54, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> >>>
> >>>On Sun, Dec 13, 2015 at 6:27 PM, Yang Zhang
> >>>wrote:
>
> On 2015/1
On 2015/12/14 13:46, Alexander Duyck wrote:
On Sun, Dec 13, 2015 at 9:22 PM, Yang Zhang wrote:
On 2015/12/14 12:54, Alexander Duyck wrote:
On Sun, Dec 13, 2015 at 6:27 PM, Yang Zhang
wrote:
On 2015/12/14 5:28, Alexander Duyck wrote:
This patch set is meant to be the guest side code for
On Sun, Dec 13, 2015 at 9:22 PM, Yang Zhang wrote:
> On 2015/12/14 12:54, Alexander Duyck wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Dec 13, 2015 at 6:27 PM, Yang Zhang
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2015/12/14 5:28, Alexander Duyck wrote:
This patch set is meant to be the guest side code for a proof of concept
>
On 2015/12/14 12:54, Alexander Duyck wrote:
On Sun, Dec 13, 2015 at 6:27 PM, Yang Zhang wrote:
On 2015/12/14 5:28, Alexander Duyck wrote:
This patch set is meant to be the guest side code for a proof of concept
involving leaving pass-through devices in the guest during the warm-up
phase of gu
On Sun, Dec 13, 2015 at 6:27 PM, Yang Zhang wrote:
> On 2015/12/14 5:28, Alexander Duyck wrote:
>>
>> This patch set is meant to be the guest side code for a proof of concept
>> involving leaving pass-through devices in the guest during the warm-up
>> phase of guest live migration. In order to ac
On 2015/12/14 5:28, Alexander Duyck wrote:
This patch set is meant to be the guest side code for a proof of concept
involving leaving pass-through devices in the guest during the warm-up
phase of guest live migration. In order to accomplish this I have added a
new function called dma_mark_dirty
28 matches
Mail list logo
