Juan Quintela writes:
> Markus Armbruster wrote:
>> Juan Quintela writes:
>>
> @@ -478,6 +478,24 @@
> #should not affect the correctness of postcopy
> migration.
> #(since 7.1)
> #
> +# @multifd-flush-after-each-section: flush
Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Juan Quintela writes:
>
@@ -478,6 +478,24 @@
#should not affect the correctness of postcopy
migration.
#(since 7.1)
#
+# @multifd-flush-after-each-section: flush every channel after each
+#
Juan Quintela writes:
> Peter Xu wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 07:02:29PM +0100, Juan Quintela wrote:
>>> We used to flush all channels at the end of each RAM section
>>> sent. That is not needed, so preparing to only flush after a full
>>> iteration through all the RAM.
>>>
>>> Default va
Peter Xu wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 07:02:29PM +0100, Juan Quintela wrote:
>> We used to flush all channels at the end of each RAM section
>> sent. That is not needed, so preparing to only flush after a full
>> iteration through all the RAM.
>>
>> Default value of the property is false. B
On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 07:02:29PM +0100, Juan Quintela wrote:
> We used to flush all channels at the end of each RAM section
> sent. That is not needed, so preparing to only flush after a full
> iteration through all the RAM.
>
> Default value of the property is false. But we return "true" in
>
We used to flush all channels at the end of each RAM section
sent. That is not needed, so preparing to only flush after a full
iteration through all the RAM.
Default value of the property is false. But we return "true" in
migrate_multifd_flush_after_each_section() until we implement the code
in
