Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call agenda for October 11th

[Avi Kivity]

On 10/11/2011 04:34 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 10/11/2011 09:01 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
>> On 10/11/2011 03:57 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>>>> What I'm trying to avoid is making choices today that close the
>>>> door on
>>>> better fixes in the future.
>>>
>>>
>>> I think Juan made a really good point in his earlier post.  We need to
>>> focus on better testing for migration.  With a solid migration torture
>>> test, we can probably eliminate much of the problems we're facing
>>> today.
>>
>> Agree, fingerprinting vmstate should help a lot.  Actually I don't think
>> the visitor is strictly required, the fingerprinter can just walk
>> vmstate structs.
>
> You mean generating a schema?  

Dumping the vmstate descriptions in a canonical format, and having a
tools that verifies that version A is compatible with version B.

> I was talking about an active migration torture test.

Those are good, but inherently limited.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function