> On 31 Oct 2018, at 20:19, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 31/10/2018 19:17, Eduardo Habkost wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 03:03:34AM +0200, Liran Alon wrote: >>> Ping. >>> Patch was submitted almost two months ago and I haven’t seen any respond for the v2 of this series. >> Sorry for the long delay. This was on my queue of patches to be >> reviewed, but I'm failing to keep up to the rate of incoming >> patches. I will try to review the series next week. > > I have already reviewed it; unfortunately I have missed the soft freeze > for posting the version I had also been working on when Liran posted > these patches. > > Paolo Paolo, note that this is v2 of this patch series. It’s not the one you have already reviewed. It now correctly handles the case you mentioned in review of v1 of migrating with various nested_state buffer sizes. The following scenarios were tested: (a) src and dest have same nested state size. ==> Migration succeeds. (b) src don't have nested state while dest do. ==> Migration succeed and src don't send it's nested state. (c) src have nested state while dest don't. ==> Migration fails as it cannot restore nested state. (d) dest have bigger max nested state size than src ==> Migration succeeds. (e) dest have smaller max nested state size than src but enough to store it's saved nested state ==> Migration succeeds (f) dest have smaller max nested state size than src but not enough to store it's saved nested state ==> Migration fails -Liran
