[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH alternative] fix migration to obey -S
From: |
Glauber Costa |
Subject: |
[Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH alternative] fix migration to obey -S |
Date: |
Mon, 27 Jul 2009 20:15:41 -0300 |
User-agent: |
Jack Bauer |
On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 04:36:53PM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> Glauber Costa wrote:
>> Hummm,, those are a little bit weird. I'd expect it to be a characteristic
>> of the
>> source machine, no the destination. IOW, if the machine was running prior to
>> migration,
>> it should be running after it, and if it was stopped prior to migration, it
>> should be
>> stopped after it.
>>
>
> Whether a guest is running is not part of it's state-IOW, it's not
> visible to the guest whether it's running or not.
Can't we then register a savevm function for that?
Otherwise, management gets quite complicated, if they really want to get the
behaviour
I described (which I believe to be the most reasonable one)
- [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] fix broken migration, Glauber Costa, 2009/07/24
- [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH] fix broken migration, Paolo Bonzini, 2009/07/24
- [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH] fix broken migration, Glauber Costa, 2009/07/27
- [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH] fix broken migration, Paolo Bonzini, 2009/07/27
- [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH] fix broken migration, Glauber Costa, 2009/07/27
- [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] fix migration to not require -S, Paolo Bonzini, 2009/07/27
- [Qemu-devel] [PATCH alternative] fix migration to obey -S, Paolo Bonzini, 2009/07/27
- [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH alternative] fix migration to obey -S, Glauber Costa, 2009/07/27
- [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH alternative] fix migration to obey -S, Anthony Liguori, 2009/07/27
- [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH alternative] fix migration to obey -S,
Glauber Costa <=
- [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH alternative] fix migration to obey -S, Anthony Liguori, 2009/07/27