On 20.02.2017 14:46, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>
> On 16/02/2017 15:51, Janosch Frank wrote:
>> While trying to fix a bug in the s390 migration code, I noticed that
>> QEMU ignores practically all errors returned from that VM ioctl. QEMU
>> behaves as specified in the KVM api and only processes -1 (
On 16/02/2017 15:51, Janosch Frank wrote:
> While trying to fix a bug in the s390 migration code, I noticed that
> QEMU ignores practically all errors returned from that VM ioctl. QEMU
> behaves as specified in the KVM api and only processes -1 (-EPERM) as an
> error.
>
> Unfortunately the docum
* Christian Borntraeger (borntrae...@de.ibm.com) wrote:
> On 02/16/2017 03:51 PM, Janosch Frank wrote:
> > While trying to fix a bug in the s390 migration code, I noticed that
> > QEMU ignores practically all errors returned from that VM ioctl. QEMU
> > behaves as specified in the KVM api and only
On 02/16/2017 03:51 PM, Janosch Frank wrote:
> While trying to fix a bug in the s390 migration code, I noticed that
> QEMU ignores practically all errors returned from that VM ioctl. QEMU
> behaves as specified in the KVM api and only processes -1 (-EPERM) as an
> error.
>
> Unfortunately the docu
While trying to fix a bug in the s390 migration code, I noticed that
QEMU ignores practically all errors returned from that VM ioctl. QEMU
behaves as specified in the KVM api and only processes -1 (-EPERM) as an
error.
Unfortunately the documentation is wrong/old and KVM may return -EFAULT,
-EINVA