Re: [Xen-devel] [PULL] qemu-xen stable update to 1.6.2

[Anthony PERARD <anthony.perard@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 03:51:42PM +0000, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Jan 2014, Anthony PERARD wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 03:42:17PM +0000, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > > On Wed, 15 Jan 2014, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 2014-01-15 at 14:35 +0000, Anthony PERARD wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 09:35:10AM +0000, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > > > > > On Tue, 2014-01-14 at 18:52 +0000, Anthony PERARD wrote:
> > > > > > > There is an update of QEMU 1.6, I have done a merge and put that 
> > > > > > > in a tree:
> > > > > > > git://xenbits.xen.org/people/aperard/qemu-dm.git  merge-1.6.2
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Based on the above I have no idea whether a freeze exception should 
> > > > > > be
> > > > > > granted for this, so my default answer is no. I'm not sure what 
> > > > > > else you
> > > > > > could have expected.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > If you think there are changes here which should be in 4.4.0 then 
> > > > > > please
> > > > > > enumerate all changes included in this merge which have any 
> > > > > > relation to
> > > > > > Xen and their potential impact on the release.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I have a list the change here that have a potential impact on Xen, 
> > > > > with
> > > > > the ones that I think are quite important at the beginning. Either the
> > > > > commit title speak for itself or I added a small description on what 
> > > > > is
> > > > > affected.
> > > > 
> > > > Thanks but there's not a lot here for me to go on WRT making a decision
> > > > on a freeze exception. Did you refer to 
> > > > http://wiki.xen.org/wiki/Xen_Roadmap/4.4#Exception_guidelines_for_after_the_code_freeze
> > > > like I said? A freeze exception needs an analysis of benefits and risks,
> > > > not the very briefest words you can possibly manage.
> > > > 
> > > > Anyway it appears this is a grab bag of things we might want and misc
> > > > fixes which are perhaps nice to have, I'm nowhere near comfortable
> > > > giving it a blanket exemption based on what you've presented here, or
> > > > even of cherry picking what might be the important ones. If you think
> > > > any or all of it is actually important for 4.4 please make a proper case
> > > > for inclusion, either of the aggregate or of the individual changes.
> > > 
> > > Anthony, did you simply update the tree by pulling from the upstream 1.6
> > > stable tree?
> > 
> > Yes, a simple merge.
> > 
> > > I also assume that you tested at the very least the basic
> > > PV and HVM configurations?
> > 
> > :(, no, I haven't try PV. But I did try HVM.
> > 
> > There is one thing that I may want to try, it's migration from the
> > previous version of Xen. There is one patch that change (fix?) that.
> 
> Please do and let me know if it works as expected.

I have tryied a pv guest, it does work fine.

I also try a migration (xl save/restore) from Xen 4.3.1 to Xen 4.4 with
both the current qemu-xen tree and with the merge of 1.6.2, but the
migration fail in both cases because of the same error reported by qemu.
(Unknown savevm section or instance '0000:02.0/cirrus_vga' 0). I did not
investigate in that. Might just be a issue with my compile script ...
(using the wrong qemu-xen tree).

-- 
Anthony PERARD

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel