Re: Re: [for-6.0 v5 11/13] spapr: PEF: prevent migration

[Daniel P . Berrangé]

On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 10:55:14AM -0800, Ram Pai wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 09:06:29AM +0100, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> > On Tue, 12 Jan 2021 10:55:11 -0800
> > Ram Pai <linuxram@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 09:19:43AM +0100, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> > > Actually the two options are inherently NOT incompatible.  Halil also
> > > mentioned this in one of his replies.
> > > 
> > > Its just that the current implementation is lacking, which will be fixed
> > > in the near future. 
> > > 
> > > We can design it upfront, with the assumption that they both are 
> > > compatible.
> > > In the short term  disable one; preferrably the secure-object, if both 
> > > options are specified. In the long term, remove the restriction, when
> > > the implemetation is complete.
> > 
> > Can't we simply mark the object as non-migratable now, and then remove
> > that later? I don't see what is so special about it.
> 
> This is fine too. 
> 
> However I am told that libvirt has some assumptions, where it assumes
> that the VM is guaranteed to be migratable if '--only-migratable' is
> specified. Silently turning off that option can be bad.

TO be clear libvirt does *not* currently use --only-migratable.

What you're describing here is QEMU's own definition of this flag

 $ qemu-system-x86_64 | grep migratable
 -only-migratable     allow only migratable devices


Regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: https://berrange.com      -o-    https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org         -o-            https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org    -o-    https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|