On Wed, Jul 31, 2024 at 08:04:24AM +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
On Tue, Jul 30, 2024 at 05:32:48PM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 30, 2024 at 04:03:53PM -0400, Peter Xu wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 30, 2024 at 03:22:50PM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > This is not what we did historically. Why should we start now?
> >
> > It's a matter of whether we still want migration to randomly fail, like
> > what this patch does.
> >
> > Or any better suggestions? I'm definitely open to that.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > --
> > Peter Xu
>
> Randomly is an overstatement. You need to switch between kernels
> where this feature differs. We did it with a ton of features
> in the past, donnu why we single out USO now.
This has been a problem with a ton of features in the past. We've
ignored the problem, but that doesn't make it the right solution
With regards,
Daniel
Pushing it to domain xml does not really help,
migration will still fail unexpectedly (after wasting
a ton of resources copying memory, and getting
a downtime bump, I might add).
The right solution is to have a tool that can query
backends, and that given the results from all of the cluster,
generate a set of parameters that will ensure migration works.
Kind of like qemu-img, but for migration.
--
MST