+
+ s->chr_sec_in = qemu_chr_find(s->sec_indev);
+ if (s->chr_sec_in == NULL) {
+ error_setg(errp, "Secondary IN Device '%s' not found",
+ s->sec_indev);
+ return;
+ }
+
+ s->chr_out = qemu_chr_find(s->outdev);
+ if (s->chr_out == NULL) {
+ error_setg(errp, "OUT Device '%s' not found", s->outdev);
+ return;
+ }
+
+ qemu_chr_fe_claim_no_fail(s->chr_pri_in);
+ qemu_chr_add_handlers(s->chr_pri_in, compare_chr_can_read,
+ compare_pri_chr_in, NULL, s);
+
+ qemu_chr_fe_claim_no_fail(s->chr_sec_in);
+ qemu_chr_add_handlers(s->chr_sec_in, compare_chr_can_read,
+ compare_sec_chr_in, NULL, s);
+
Btw, what's the reason of handling this in main loop? I thought it
would
be better to do this in colo thread? Otherwise, you need lots of
extra
synchronizations?
Do you mean we should start/stop/do checkpoint it by colo-frame?
I mean we probably want to handle pri_in and sec_in in colo compare
thread. Through this way, there's no need for extra synchronization
with
main loop.
I get your point, but how to do this.
Now, we use qemu_chr_add_handlers to do this job.
You probably want to start a new main loop in colo comparing thread.
IIUC, do you mean
- remove char device read_handler
↓at colo comparing thread↓
while (true) {
- blocking read packet from char device with select(2)/poll(2)...
- compare packet
}
Yes, something like this.
This solution will lead comparing packet and reading packet in serial.
But i don't know if this will have a good performance.
This probably won't have the best performance but it simplify lots of
things. Actually doing it in main loop will slow down all other I/O
processing. Consider colo can only handling userspace network traffic
now, we could start from this. For performance, it needs lots of other
stuff: I think the most important thing is to add vhost support.
Thanks
Thanks
zhangchen
.
.