Re: [Libvirt-cim] [PATCH 3 of 4] Add MigrationType support to VirtualSystemMigrationService

Kaitlin Rupert wrote: > Heidi Eckhart wrote: >> Is the type CIM_MIGRATE_LIVE or VIR_MIGRATE_LIVE ? > The CIM_MIGRATE_LIVE corresponds to the value defined in the mof, > which is 2. However, the value of VIR_MIGRATE_LIVE is defined by > libvirt. > > So when someone specifies a migration type of 2 (CIM_MIGRATE_LIVE) in > the MigrationSettingData, we'll need to use VIR_MIGRATE_LIVE when we > call virDomainMigrate(). Thanks for this explanation. > > For static migration, libvirt uses a value of 0. There's two type > values here.. the value set for the MigrationType attribute of > MigrationSettingData and the value libvirt uses to differentiate > between static and live migration. ... > It is a little more redundant this way, but it might help with > readability. Thank you for this very good explanation. This makes now much more sense to me :). But I think recoding as you suggested is not necessary, as it would bring too much redundancy (as you already said) into the code. Now that I understood it, I'm absolutely fine with it. Its not very consistent that libvirt uses VIR_MIGRATE_LIVE and 0 (instead of VIR_MIGRATE_STATIC or something else) as values, but that's something we seem to live with.