Hi Marcelo, On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 12:19:08AM -0200, Marcelo Tosatti wrote: > On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 03:17:39PM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 8:58 PM, Hu Tao <hu...@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote: > > > But in the case of panic notification, more dependency means more > > > chances of failure of panic notification. Say, if we use a virtio device > > > to do panic notification, then we will fail if: virtio itself has > > > problems, virtio for some reason can't be deployed(neither built-in or > > > as a module), or guest doesn't support virtio, etc. > > > > Add polling to your virtio device. If it didn't notify of a panic but > > taking more than 20 sec to answer your poll request you can assume > > it's dead. > > > > Actually, just use virtio-serial and something in userspace on the guest. > > They want the guest to stop, so a memory dump can be taken by management > interface. > > Hu Tao, lets assume port I/O is the preferred method for communication.
Okey. > Now, the following comments have still not been addressed: > > 1) Lifecycle of the stopped guest and interaction with other stopped > states in QEMU. Patch 3 already deals with run state transitions. But in case I'm missing something, could you be more specific? > > 2) Format of the interface for other architectures (you can choose > a different KVM supported architecture and write an example). > > 3) Clear/documented management interface for the feature. It is documented in patch 0: Documentation/virtual/kvm/pv_event.txt. Does it need to be improved? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
