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

Re: [libvirt] [RFC PATCH v2 0/3] Start fixing the pvpanic mess



On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 06:51:11PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 21/08/2013 18:48, Daniel P. Berrange ha scritto:
> > No, <on_crash> is the right thing to be using for this from
> > libvirt's pov & I don't think we should invent something new.
> > The <on_crash> element has always been intended to represent
> > handling of guest panics, not qemu internal errors.
> 
> Actually for Xen HVM guests, it mostly traps things such as failed
> vmentries.  The Xen PV-on-HVM drivers do not register a panic notifier
> that moves the guest to the "crashed" state.
> 
> <on_crash> cannot be salvaged, in my opinion, because all domain XMLs in
> the wild will have a setting that causes libvirt to add "-device
> isa-pvpanic".  Thus changing libvirt versions will change guest
> hardware, which is _very_ bad.
> 
> In addition, Windows XP and 2003 will show the annoying device wizard
> upon a libvirt upgrade, and fixing this is what surfaced all the mess.

The existance of a <on_crash> element should not be having any
effect on what hardware we create. That is merely a lifecycle
policy setting that should be completely independant of the
guest device model.

eg it is valid to have <on_crash> present in the XML at all
times, even if there's no pvpanic device present. That simply
means the actions will never be triggered.


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]