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

Re: [libvirt] [PATCH 05/11] libxl: use job functions in libxlDomainDestroyFlags



Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 06, 2014 at 08:53:09PM -0700, Jim Fehlig wrote:
>   
>> Modify operation that needs to wait in the queue of modify jobs.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jim Fehlig <jfehlig suse com>
>> ---
>>  src/libxl/libxl_driver.c | 21 +++++++++++++++------
>>  1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>     
>
>   
>> diff --git a/src/libxl/libxl_driver.c b/src/libxl/libxl_driver.c
>> index caabb44..bb574bc 100644
>> --- a/src/libxl/libxl_driver.c
>> +++ b/src/libxl/libxl_driver.c
>> @@ -1549,6 +1549,7 @@ libxlDomainDestroyFlags(virDomainPtr dom,
>>      libxlDriverPrivatePtr driver = dom->conn->privateData;
>>      virDomainObjPtr vm;
>>      int ret = -1;
>> +    bool remove_dom = false;
>>      virObjectEventPtr event = NULL;
>>  
>>      virCheckFlags(0, -1);
>> @@ -1559,10 +1560,13 @@ libxlDomainDestroyFlags(virDomainPtr dom,
>>      if (virDomainDestroyFlagsEnsureACL(dom->conn, vm->def) < 0)
>>          goto cleanup;
>>  
>> +    if (libxlDomainObjBeginJob(driver, vm, LIBXL_JOB_DESTROY) < 0)
>> +        goto cleanup;
>>     
>
> So there's one complication in the destroy method. You really,
> really want destroy to succeed no matter what. In the QEMU driver
> we will kill -9 the QEMU process from outside the job condition.
> This should unblock any currently active jobs, so when we then
> begin the destroy job there's no delay. In the libvirtd daemon
> RPC dispatch code, the destroy method is also marked as high
> priority so it gets processed in a dedicated thread pool for
> high priority RPC calls. Again we don't want high priority
> calls to be blocked by low priority calls.
>   

Thanks for the info.

> With this it looks like you're just going to wait indefinitely
> for any pending job to complete before attempting to kill the
> guest.
>   

Well, wait for 30 seconds and then fail, but yes, you are right :).

> Is there anything you can safely do with the libxl APIs which
> would be equivalent to kill -9, outside the job block.

I think libxl_domain_destroy() is the kill -9 equivalent.  Adding Ian
Jackson to confirm...

>  Then
> you just need the job to protect cleanup of the internal state
> on virDomainObjPtr.
>   

Yep, makes sense.  I'll adjust the patches accordingly.

Regards,
Jim


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