From: Wolfgang Bumiller <w.bumiller@proxmox.com>
To: Fiona Ebner <f.ebner@proxmox.com>
Cc: "Proxmox VE development discussion" <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>,
"Fabian Grünbichler" <f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com>
Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [RFC qemu-server 1/1] partially fix #4501: migration: start vm: move port reservation and usage closer together
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2023 12:21:16 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <o2c5komnd77okwarvdrv77kdw3tuxzmtllypzlfilzbb7nsw2o@gvzgbwycpj3c> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <810f3423-7f55-4915-96c8-550241b191de@proxmox.com>
On Wed, Nov 15, 2023 at 11:22:46AM +0100, Fiona Ebner wrote:
> Am 15.11.23 um 11:12 schrieb Wolfgang Bumiller:
> >
> > What about adding an option to `next_migrate_port()` to actually return
> > the open socket to keep the reservation?
> >
> > Also, did we consider passing the file descriptor through to qemu via
> > `-incoming fd:$number`?
> >
>
> Sounds promising :) We do invoke QEMU after forking. Is there any
> pitfall with that and passing the fd? Or is it enough if we simply don't
> touch it or close it in the parent?
We just have to explicitly remove the CLOEXEC flag from the fd before
the exec() happens.
Since we use `run_command` for the exec, I've been wondering if maybe
`run_command` itself should get an `fds => [ numbers ]` list it should
drop the CLOEXEC on before opening the subprocess and then restoring the
original flags afterwards.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-11-15 11:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-11-14 14:02 [pve-devel] [RFC qemu-server/common] fix #4501: improve port reservation for QEMU TCP migration Fiona Ebner
2023-11-14 14:02 ` [pve-devel] [RFC qemu-server 1/1] partially fix #4501: migration: start vm: move port reservation and usage closer together Fiona Ebner
2023-11-15 8:55 ` Fabian Grünbichler
2023-11-15 10:12 ` Wolfgang Bumiller
2023-11-15 10:22 ` Fiona Ebner
2023-11-15 11:21 ` Wolfgang Bumiller [this message]
2023-11-14 14:02 ` [pve-devel] [RFC common 1/2] partially fix #4501: next unused port: bump port reservation expiretime Fiona Ebner
2023-11-15 8:51 ` Fabian Grünbichler
2023-11-14 14:02 ` [pve-devel] [RFC common 2/2] fix #4501: next unused port: work around issue with too short expiretime Fiona Ebner
2023-11-14 14:13 ` Fiona Ebner
2023-11-15 8:51 ` Fabian Grünbichler
2023-11-15 10:16 ` Fiona Ebner
2023-11-15 10:27 ` Fabian Grünbichler
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=o2c5komnd77okwarvdrv77kdw3tuxzmtllypzlfilzbb7nsw2o@gvzgbwycpj3c \
--to=w.bumiller@proxmox.com \
--cc=f.ebner@proxmox.com \
--cc=f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com \
--cc=pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox