Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call agenda for Tuesday 28th

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

 



On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Il 28/02/2012 15:39, Stefan Hajnoczi ha scritto:
>> I'm not a fan of transactions or freeze/thaw (if used to atomically
>> perform other commands).
>>
>> We should not export low-level block device operations so that
>> external software can micromanage via QMP.  I don't think this is a
>> good idea because it takes the block device offline and possibly
>> blocks the VM.  We're reaching a level comparable to an HTTP interface
>> for acquiring pthread mutex, doing some operations, and then another
>> HTTP request to unlock it.  This is micromanagement it will create
>> more problems because we will have to support lots of little API
>> functions.
>
> So you're for extending Jeff's patches to group mirroring etc.?
>
> That's also my favorite one, assuming we can do it in time for 1.1.

Yes, that's the approach I like the most.  It's relatively clean and
leaves us space to develop -blockdev.

Stefan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [KVM ARM]     [KVM ia64]     [KVM ppc]     [Virtualization Tools]     [Spice Development]     [Libvirt]     [Libvirt Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Questions]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]
  Powered by Linux