[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] exec: eliminate ram naming issue as migration

From: Tan, Jianfeng
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] exec: eliminate ram naming issue as migration
Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2018 07:49:58 +0000

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paolo Bonzini [mailto:address@hidden
> Sent: Tuesday, February 6, 2018 1:32 AM
> To: Igor Mammedov
> Cc: Tan, Jianfeng; address@hidden; Jason Wang; Maxime Coquelin;
> Michael S . Tsirkin
> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] exec: eliminate ram naming issue as
> migration
> On 05/02/2018 18:15, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Then we would have both ram block named pc.ram:
> >>>               Block Name    PSize
> >>>                       pc.ram     4 KiB
> >>>       /objects/pc.ram    2 MiB
> >>>
> >>> But I assume it's a corner case which not really happen.
> >> Yeah, you're right. :/  I hadn't thought of hotplug.  It can happen indeed.
> >
> > perhaps we should fail object_add memory-backend-foo if it resulted
> > in creating ramblock with duplicate id
> Note that it would only be duplicated with Jianfeng's patch.  So I'm
> worried that his patch is worse than what we have now, because it may
> create conflicts with system RAMBlock names are not necessarily
> predictable.  Right now, -object creates RAMBlock names that are nicely
> constrained within /object/.

So we are trading off between the benefit it takes and the bad effect it brings.

I'm wondering if the above example is the only failed case this patch leads to, 
i.e, only there is a ram named "pc.ram" and "/object/pc.ram" in the src VM?

Please also consider the second option, that adding an alias name for RAMBlock; 
I'm not a big fan for that one, as it just pushes the problem to 

Or any other suggestions?


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]