Based on: Message-ID: <20231017083003.15951-1-quintela@xxxxxxxxxx>
Migration 20231017 patches
On this v6:
- Fixed Markus comments
- 1st patch is reviewed
- dropped the RFC ones.
Later, Juan.
On this v5:
- Rebased on top of last migration pull requesnt:
- address markus comments. Basically we recommend always
blockdev-mirror + NBD. In deprecated.rst we also put the posiblity
of using block-incremental and block, but we state that they are
also deprecated.
I know, I know, I deprecated them in the following patch.
- Dropped the removal of block-migration and block-incremental I am
only interested in showing why I want to remove the -b/-i options.
Please review.
Later, Juan.
On this v4:
- addressed all markus comments.
- rebased on latest.
- improve formatting of migration.json
- print block migration status when needed.
- patches 7-10 are not mean to merge, they just show why we want to
deprecate block migration and remove its support.
- Patch 7 just drop support for -i/-b and qmp equivalents.
- Patch 8 shows all the helpers and convolutions we need to have to
support that -i and -d.
- patch 9 drops block-incremental migration support.
- patch 9 drops block migration support.
Please review.
Thanks, Juan.
On this v3:
- Rebase on top of upstream.
- Changed v8.1 to 8.2 (I left the reviewed by anyways)
- missing the block deprecation code, please.
Please, review.
Later, Juan.
On this v2:
- dropped -incoming <uri> deprecation
Paolo came with a better solution using keyvalues.
- skipped field is already ready for next pull request, so dropped.
- dropped the RFC bits, nermal PATCH.
- Assessed all the review comments.
- Added indentation of migration.json.
- Used the documentation pointer to substitute block migration.
Please review.
[v1]
Hi this series describe the migration parts that have to be deprecated.
- It is an rfc because I doubt that I did the deprecation process right. Hello Markus O:-)
- skipped field: It is older than me, I have never know what it stands
for. As far as I know it has always been zero.
- inc/blk migrate command options. They are only used by block
migration (that I deprecate on the following patch). And they are really bad.
grep must_remove_block_options.
- block migration. block jobs, whatever they are called this week are
way more flexible. Current code works, but we broke it here and
there, and really nobody has stand up to maintain it. It is quite
contained and can be left there. Is anyone really using it?
- old compression method. It don't work. See last try from Lukas to
make a test that works reliabely. I failed with the same task years
ago. It is really slow, and if compression is good for you, multifd
+ zlib is going to perform/compress way more.
I don't know what to do with this code, really.
* Remove it for this release? It don't work, and haven't work
reliabely in quite a few time.
* Deprecate it and remove in another couple of releases, i.e. normal
deprecation.
* Ideas?
- -incoming <uri>
if you need to set parameters (multifd cames to mind, and preempt has
the same problem), you really needs to use defer. So what should we do here?
This part is not urget, because management apps have a working
option that are already using "defer", and the code simplifacation
if we remove it is not so big. So we can leave it until 9.0 or
whatever we think fit.
What do you think?
Later, Juan.
Juan Quintela (5):
migration: Print block status when needed
migration: migrate 'inc' command option is deprecated.
migration: migrate 'blk' command option is deprecated.
migration: Deprecate block migration
migration: Deprecate old compression method
docs/about/deprecated.rst | 36 +++++++++++++
qapi/migration.json | 93 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
migration/block.c | 3 ++
migration/migration-hmp-cmds.c | 15 ++++--
migration/migration.c | 10 ++++
migration/options.c | 22 +++++++-
6 files changed, 153 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
--
2.41.0
