Re: [libvirt] [PATCH v11] support offline migration

On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 7:42 PM, liguang <lig.fnst(a)cn.fujitsu.com&gt; wrote: > original migration did not aware of offline case, > so, try to support offline migration quietly > (did not disturb original migration) by pass > VIR_MIGRATE_OFFLINE flag to migration APIs if only > the domain is really inactive, and > migration process will not puzzled by domain > offline and exit unexpectedly. > these changes did not take care of disk images the > domain required, for them could be transferred by > other APIs as suggested, then VIR_MIGRATE_OFFLINE > should not combined with VIR_MIGRATE_NON_SHARED_*. > if you want a persistent migration, > you should do "virsh migrate --persistent" youself. > > Signed-off-by: liguang <lig.fnst(a)cn.fujitsu.com&gt; > --- > include/libvirt/libvirt.h.in | 1 + > src/qemu/qemu_driver.c | 15 ++++++++++ > src/qemu/qemu_migration.c | 60 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------ > src/qemu/qemu_migration.h | 3 +- > tools/virsh-domain.c | 6 ++++ > 5 files changed, 75 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/include/libvirt/libvirt.h.in b/include/libvirt/libvirt.h.in > index 81f12a4..1cebc21 100644 > --- a/include/libvirt/libvirt.h.in > +++ b/include/libvirt/libvirt.h.in > @@ -995,6 +995,7 @@ typedef enum { > * whole migration process; this will be used automatically > * when supported */ > VIR_MIGRATE_UNSAFE = (1 << 9), /* force migration even if it is considered unsafe */ > + VIR_MIGRATE_OFFLINE = (1 << 10), /* offline migrate */ > } virDomainMigrateFlags; > > /* Domain migration. */ > diff --git a/src/qemu/qemu_driver.c b/src/qemu/qemu_driver.c > index 97ad23e..38bfcab 100644 > --- a/src/qemu/qemu_driver.c > +++ b/src/qemu/qemu_driver.c > @@ -9622,6 +9622,20 @@ qemuDomainMigrateBegin3(virDomainPtr domain, > } > > if (!virDomainObjIsActive(vm)) { > + if (flags & VIR_MIGRATE_OFFLINE) { > + if (flags & (VIR_MIGRATE_NON_SHARED_DISK| > + VIR_MIGRATE_NON_SHARED_INC)) { > + virReportError(VIR_ERR_OPERATION_INVALID, > + "%s", _("migrating storage handled by volume APIs")); > + goto endjob; > + } > + if (!(flags & VIR_MIGRATE_PERSIST_DEST)) { > + virReportError(VIR_ERR_OPERATION_INVALID, > + "%s", _("VIR_MIGRATE_OFFLINE should combined with VIR_MIGRATE_PERSIST_DEST")); I feel like maybe we should just assume that VIR_MIGRATE_OFFLINE implies VIR_MIGRATE_PERSIST_DEST and if its not supplied add it to the flags. Dan, do you agree or disagree?