Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH V5 29/32] xl: use "libxl-json" format

[Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 2014-05-20 at 16:13 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Ian Campbell writes ("Re: [PATCH V5 29/32] xl: use "libxl-json" format"):
> > On Tue, 2014-05-13 at 22:54 +0100, Wei Liu wrote:
> > > Tests done so far (xl.{new,old} denotes xl with{,out} "xl_json"
> > > support):
> > > 
> > > 1. xl.new create then xl.new save, hexdump saved file: domain config
> > >    saved in JSON format
> > > 2. xl.new create, xl.new save then xl.old restore: failed on
> > >    mandatory flag check
> > > 3. xl.new create, xl.new save then xl.new restore: succeeded
> > > 4. xl.old create, xl.old save then xl.new restore: succeeded
> > > 5. xl.new create then local migrate, receiving end xl.new: succeeded
> > > 6. xl.old create then local migrate, receiving end xl.new: succeeded
> > 
> > I think xl.old create, xl.new save, xl.new restore would be interesting
> > (it should work I think)
> 
> The first xl.new won't find the stored json domain config, so no.  But
> this isn't something you're supposed to be able to do between Xen
> releases (because new tools means new hypervisor so a reboot).

Yes, I was thinking in a developer oriented way where I'm too lazy to
reboot ;-)

> > For cases like #4 and #6 if you subsequently save the domain does it use
> > xl or libxl-json? What I'm asking is does the oldness persist forever or
> > is it laundered out (which in turn feeds into how long old support needs
> > to stay in the tree...)
> 
> AIUI it gets laundered out.

Good!

Ian.



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel