[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220223024735.GL10061@nvidia.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2022 22:47:35 -0400
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
To: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>
Cc: Yishai Hadas <yishaih@...dia.com>, bhelgaas@...gle.com,
saeedm@...dia.com, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, kuba@...nel.org, leonro@...dia.com,
kwankhede@...dia.com, mgurtovoy@...dia.com, maorg@...dia.com,
cohuck@...hat.com, ashok.raj@...el.com, kevin.tian@...el.com,
shameerali.kolothum.thodi@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V8 mlx5-next 09/15] vfio: Define device migration
protocol v2
On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 06:09:34PM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> So if/when we were to support this, we might use a different SET_STATE
> feature ioctl that allows the user to specify a deadline and we'd use
> feature probing or a flag on the migration feature for userspace to
> discover this? I'd be ok with that, I just want to make sure we have
> agreeable options to support it. Thanks,
I think we'd just make the set_state struct longer and add a cap flag
for deadline?
Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists