qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Guest stop notification


From: Jan Kiszka
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Guest stop notification
Date: Thu, 01 Dec 2011 18:36:17 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686 (x86_64); de; rv:1.8.1.12) Gecko/20080226 SUSE/2.0.0.12-1.1 Thunderbird/2.0.0.12 Mnenhy/0.7.5.666

On 2011-12-01 18:22, Eric B Munson wrote:
> On Thu, 01 Dec 2011, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> 
>> On 2011-11-29 22:36, Eric B Munson wrote:
>>> Often when a guest is stopped from the qemu console, it will report spurious
>>> soft lockup warnings on resume.  There are kernel patches being discussed 
>>> that
>>> will give the host the ability to tell the guest that it is being stopped 
>>> and
>>> should ignore the soft lockup warning that generates.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Eric B Munson <address@hidden>
>>> Cc: address@hidden
>>> Cc: address@hidden
>>> Cc: address@hidden
>>> Cc: address@hidden
>>> Cc: address@hidden
>>> Cc: address@hidden
>>> ---
>>>  target-i386/kvm.c |    6 ++++++
>>>  1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/target-i386/kvm.c b/target-i386/kvm.c
>>> index 5bfc21f..defd364 100644
>>> --- a/target-i386/kvm.c
>>> +++ b/target-i386/kvm.c
>>> @@ -336,12 +336,18 @@ static int kvm_inject_mce_oldstyle(CPUState *env)
>>>      return 0;
>>>  }
>>>  
>>> +static void kvm_put_guest_paused(CPUState *penv)
>>> +{
>>> +    kvm_vcpu_ioctl(penv, KVM_GUEST_PAUSED, 0);
>>> +}
>>
>> I see no need in encapsulating this in a separate function.
>>
>>> +
>>>  static void cpu_update_state(void *opaque, int running, RunState state)
>>>  {
>>>      CPUState *env = opaque;
>>>  
>>>      if (running) {
>>>          env->tsc_valid = false;
>>> +   kvm_put_guest_paused(env);
>>
>> checkpatch.pl would have asked you to remove this tab.
>>
>> More general:
>>
>> Why is this x86-only? If the kernel interface is x86-only, what prevents
>> making it generic right from the beginning?
> 
> Sorry, missed this question on the first pass, this is x86 only because the
> flag used lives in the pvclock structure.  AFAICT, there aren't any other
> architectures out there that implement paravirtualized clocks yet.

That's an implementation "detail" of the kernel. The interface (IOCTL or
kvm_run field) is generic, no?

I would just fire this notification from generic code, evaluate the
error (that was lacking so far), and only report it if it's something
else than "not supported".

Jan

-- 
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT T DE IT 1
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]