[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH V3] Guest stop notification

From: Jan Kiszka
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH V3] Guest stop notification
Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2011 14:46:06 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686 (x86_64); de; rv: Gecko/20080226 SUSE/ Thunderbird/ Mnenhy/

On 2011-12-05 14:35, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 03, 2011 at 12:45:51PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>>> I was referring to the relation between the IOCTL and kvmclock, but
>>>> IOCTL vs. kvm_run.
>>>> Jan
>>> Ah, OK. Yes, we better characterize it as KVMCLOCK specific (a generic
>>> "guest is paused" command is not the scope of this patch).
>>> So appending KVMCLOCK_ to the ioctl definitions would make that more
>>> explicit.
>> IMHO, that would move things in the wrong direction. The IOCTL in itself
>> has _nothing_ to do with kvmclock. It's just that its x86 backend is
>> implemented on top of that infrastructure. For me the IOCTL is pretty
>> generic, can be backed by kvmclock, but need not be on all future archs.
>> Jan
> I do not see the need to lift this infrastructure to arch independent
> status at the moment, without clear semantics on that arch independent
> level.
> So I am fine with the current GUEST_PAUSED naming (which can later be
> extended with GUEST_RESUMED etc, if necessary, for use by other archs
> for example), and implementation in hw/kvmclock.c.

Yes, let's keep it as suggested last (addition of kvmclock, unchanged
IOCTL interface).


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

reply via email to

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