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

Re: [libvirt] [PATCH 0/2] Check domain status before virsh suspend or resume



On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 11:23:09AM -0600, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 04/15/2013 11:04 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 12:49:12PM -0400, John Ferlan wrote:
> >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=906644
> >>
> >> Added checks to both virsh suspend and virsh resume for the domain to be
> >> in a the right state before trying the suspend/resume. Similar checks to
> >> examples/domsuspend/suspend.c.
> > 
> > IMHO this is just a pointless bug request. State checks don't
> > belong in virsh for a start, since that makes it inherantly
> > racey. While the drivers do check for whether the domain is
> > running, they explicitly chose not to raise an error if the
> > VM is already paused, when pause is executed & vica-verca
> 
> I agree that doing it in virsh is too racy.  If anything, we would need
> to implement new virDomainSuspendFlags() and virDomainResumeFlags() to
> let the user pass in a flag that controls whether or not they want
> libvirtd to reject a no-op state change (we can't change the default in
> libvirtd, for fear of breaking existing clients, but the only way to do
> a non-racy non-default behavior is to add a flag which requires adding API).

I don't think that anyone cares about this in the real world, so IMHO
the correct action is to CLOSED -> WONTFIX the bug report.

Regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: http://berrange.com      -o-    http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org              -o-             http://virt-manager.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org       -o-         http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: http://entangle-photo.org       -o-       http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|


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