From nobody Mon May 01 02:31:23 2023 X-Original-To: freebsd-hackers@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4Q8nJj4WDgz48d9l; Mon, 1 May 2023 02:31:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rob.fx907@gmail.com) Received: from mail-ej1-x629.google.com (mail-ej1-x629.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::629]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "GTS CA 1D4" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4Q8nJj44XLz3KF7; Mon, 1 May 2023 02:31:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rob.fx907@gmail.com) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none Received: by mail-ej1-x629.google.com with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-94a342f4c8eso61561466b.0; Sun, 30 Apr 2023 19:31:17 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20221208; t=1682908276; x=1685500276; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=OZb/SU58VWwmR4byX4uYgVx8EtL+8JbEAI9GQuJXP3o=; b=rCaofLwsLkWba8NXiEaA58TiFBtfk+WxQNr5CkEBwVxRJjnX9QFTetqOFMl0cgbvw1 hu5mRchRnsCyOpUv6XBxCyhrtpK56kq8usE3KRPlGQzwCyLHsI7Jizebo5V4vHgNGhyc 69MGQlYg8K6HLQYdtUNpHvRjG/8k4G+36/X5C2N966CBdgAgyXKppvjKUC2/AnTrNCjX YxC2peMaSHaqBc340AKW93LOsyt0iI3awRhSad5Yj72miCku4Zf0z3T7i3s1Ni7hbktx tleFhuRpdpuJ4EC79pJ62ct9moBw6EQOnlnqd8QWGKCDhlel6gNim9Aff4S/0cXeyGRd M14A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1682908276; x=1685500276; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=OZb/SU58VWwmR4byX4uYgVx8EtL+8JbEAI9GQuJXP3o=; b=l88plTLx/H/iwS0BihqK4k5rSYD0aMJ4ihn15K8mXvzzwYQwm1r5j9ukYYH8W2BRa0 uAN2+LM4K2CqgjcpGziyYCIm7Z+PqiWTevd0OasQuEMTqRq+rkPBeSvQwFOMJ9vfc9Mh Rm86OYie0yMvZx08d3LgNkI+NKjwwpGUl2o1dYslx2q4Y/I6v4cr6T9G08cfwbvT3oAo mc4g/HHao+n+fv8+g8oVq529uKFqlZ5OgEapN2MgHgPIByQKHVo/n3KGbqVvz5NMeu+1 xAOB8qYANb3Q0PCWxCdzKhFlUADWzqxhKy2gHEns0OhCkITYloHvrNQmnGtz8oWPgtqB cKSQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AC+VfDx8bT5e1I2PC3u5Fg8mxPbJLtcBwZWXA9fwuVbzdNcePZYfeVqj kHMwEVnrTGyAZFRmoyB27ywWhQU9q7ShO1i9Y/E= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACHHUZ4DYbtAiLv8F3woIC1hFX3lqGnicM5Cuqon6VPc7QiMv9E+3jcjeNd0Yms+G10V+hfMHvOM7kef8G6iOegbPR0= X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:7483:b0:94e:8b6c:462c with SMTP id e3-20020a170906748300b0094e8b6c462cmr7948246ejl.2.1682908275818; Sun, 30 Apr 2023 19:31:15 -0700 (PDT) List-Id: Technical discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-hackers List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Rob Wing Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2023 18:31:23 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: BHYVE_SNAPSHOT To: Matthew Grooms Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org, elenamihailescu22@gmail.com, Mihai Carabas , gusev.vitaliy@gmail.com Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000f8434305fa989d84" X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4Q8nJj44XLz3KF7 X-Spamd-Bar: ---- X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:15169, ipnet:2a00:1450::/32, country:US]; TAGGED_RCPT(0.00)[]; TAGGED_FROM(0.00)[] X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action; module=replies; Message is reply to one we originated X-ThisMailContainsUnwantedMimeParts: N --000000000000f8434305fa989d84 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hey Matthew, On Sun, Apr 30, 2023 at 1:41=E2=80=AFPM Matthew Grooms = wrote: > > Would you like to see support for VM snapshots in the generic kernel? > Is there a review open that addresses the limitations described in the commit message that brought the snapshot feature in? https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-src/commit/483d953a86a2507355f8287c5107d= c827a0ff516 > How about support for warm or live migration? This builds off the snapshot work, right? Seems like it'd make more sense to address the current limitations of the snapshot code before extending the functionality off the top of it. > There are experimental patches for all these features that were developed > by students at UPB. In a lot of cases, there are open reviews that have > been waiting on feedback for ages. > In general, most people don't want to review large experimental patches. > The case is quite plain. I'm not sure what the solution is to this > problem. I'd love to hear feedback from the community about how I've got > this completely wrong and how the course could be corrected. That would > be something. > My perspective is that it would have been better to focus student efforts on completing the snapshot feature. By completing the snapshot feature, I mean getting the code into a state where it's compiled in by default and no longer considered an experimental feature. -Rob --000000000000f8434305fa989d84 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hey Matthew,

=
On Sun, Apr 30, 2023 at 1:41=E2=80=AF= PM Matthew Grooms <mgrooms@shrew.ne= t> wrote:

Would you like to see support for VM snapshots in the generic kernel?

Is there a review open that addresses the li= mitations described in the commit message that brought the snapshot feature= in? https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-src/commit/= 483d953a86a2507355f8287c5107dc827a0ff516
=C2=A0
How about support for warm or live migration?

This builds off the snapshot work, right? Seems like it'd make more = sense to address the current limitations of the snapshot code before extend= ing the functionality off the top of it.
=C2=A0
There are experimental patches fo= r all these features that were developed by students at UPB. In a lot of ca= ses, there are open reviews that have been waiting on feedback for ages.

In general, most people don't want to= review large experimental patches.
=C2=A0
The case is quite plain. I'm not sure what the solution is to this
problem. I'd love to hear feedback from the community about how I'v= e got
this completely wrong and how the course could be corrected. That would be something.

My perspective is that it= would have been better to focus student efforts on completing the snapshot= feature. By completing the snapshot feature, I mean getting the code into = a state where it's compiled in by default and no longer considered an e= xperimental feature.

-Rob
--000000000000f8434305fa989d84--