Hi Daniel, On 2020/7/28 18:21, Daniel Henrique Barboza wrote: > > > On 7/28/20 5:46 AM, zhukeqian wrote: >> Hi Daniel, >> >> On 2020/7/17 22:33, Daniel Henrique Barboza wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 7/15/20 3:18 AM, Keqian Zhu wrote: >>>> For that Qemu supports returning incoming migration info since its commit >>>> 65ace0604551 (migration: add postcopy total blocktime into query-migrate), >>> >>> >>> It is worth saying that this QEMU commit that decoupled the RAM >>> status from the active migration status is live since early 2018: >>> >>> $ git show 65ace0604551 >>> commit 65ace060455122a461cdc9302238b914084bcd42 >>> Author: Alexey Perevalov <a.perevalov@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>> Date: Thu Mar 22 21:17:27 2018 +0300 >>> >>> migration: add postcopy total blocktime into query-migrate >>> >>> $ git describe 65ace0604551 >>> v2.12.0-6-g65ace06045 >>> >>> >>> I am not sure if we care about removing a migration failure check for >>> QEMU 2.12 when we're waiting for 5.1 to come out. My guess is that we >>> do care, but not enough to demand a "if (QEMU <= 2.12)" in this logic. >>> I'll also assume that the existing failure check is doing more harm than >>> good nowadays, so: >>> >>> >>> Reviewed-by: Daniel Henrique Barboza <danielhb413@xxxxxxxxx> >>> >> Do you have authority to merge this patch? > > I don't have the authority to merge this in. > > We're on code freeze for release 6.6.0 at this moment, meaning that only > urgent fixes will make it upstream during this time frame. I believe a > commiter/maintainer will be able to review/merge this patch shortly > after that. OK, I see. Thanks :-) > > > Thanks, > > > DHB > >> >> Thanks, >> Keqian >> >
