Jan Kiszka wrote: > Avi Kivity wrote: > >> Jan Kiszka wrote: >> >>> Guido Guenther wrote: >>> >>> >>>> Hi Jan, >>>> On Sat, Jan 19, 2008 at 04:40:06PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> What about additionally listening on signals? If you run qemu from the >>>>> console, you can then just press ctrl-c to shut the guest down (instead >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Catching ctrl-c sounds like a good idea but "ctrl-c, ctrl-c" should >>>> probably kill qemu then, since the machine might have no acpid running - >>>> in that case hitting ctrl-c would have no effect. >>>> >>>> >>> Good idea. >>> >>> >> I'm worried about the 30+ second shutdown latency. Is there precedent >> for SIGTERM or SIGINT requiring this long to take effect? >> > > Sorry, can't follow this yet: Are you talking about host system shutdown > that should wait on the guest system that long? > >
Mostly that ctrl-C shouldn't take long, especially without some kind of visual indication (say with headless or vnc). >> Maybe we should suspend the VM instead (using qemu suspend, not guest >> suspend). >> > > You mean on SIGTERM? I think Guido's concern was that this signal is > expected to actually kill the qemu instance. Therefore I dropped this > signal from my second patch. > As a fast, non-guest dependent to shutdown, whichever signals we eventually hook into it. I think that for the unmanaged case we need to improve the windowed interface instead of hooking signals. The managed case can handle anything we throw at it as long as it's well defined. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ kvm-devel mailing list kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel
