From: Sander Eikelenboom <linux@eikelenboom.it>
To: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com>
Cc: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com>,
xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>,
Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>
Subject: Re: xl shutdown --wait "racy"
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 16:55:55 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1596839466.20140416165555@eikelenboom.it> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1397658810.24638.197.camel@kazak.uk.xensource.com>
Wednesday, April 16, 2014, 4:33:30 PM, you wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-04-16 at 16:26 +0200, Sander Eikelenboom wrote:
>> Wednesday, April 16, 2014, 4:13:59 PM, you wrote:
>>
>> > On Wed, 2014-04-16 at 16:08 +0200, Sander Eikelenboom wrote:
>> >> Hi Ian (C|J) Konrad,
>> >>
>> >> I'm currently trying to workaround the pci-(detach|assignable-remove) issues i
>> >> reported earlier.
>> >>
>> >> The workaround i thought of was:
>> >> - shutting down the guest
>> >> - starting it without 1 of the original devices passed through
>> >> - use xl pci-assignable-remove and bind the device to the dom0 driver.
>> >>
>> >> But during this i noticed that a "xl shutdown --wait" does wait .. but returns:
>> >> - Before the domain is removed from for instance "xl list", it still listed there in
>> >> "--ps--" state.
>> >> - before pciback has done it's restore config space magic.
>> >>
>> >> So it seems the wait loop is exiting somewhat prematurely, is this expected ?
>>
>> > It is waiting for the domain to be shutdown (state 's') not for the
>> > domain to be destroyed. So it's doing what it said it would (I
>> > appreciate you might not find this distinction helpful under the
>> > circumstances...)
>>
>> It's at least not entirely what i expected ;-)
>>
>> Is it because there can be different "follow-up actions" due to the
>> "on_poweroff=" config option ?
> Not really, those are somewhat unrelated.
> shutdown and destroy are two distinct events. Once a domain has shutdown
> (called the shutdown hypercall etc) it goes into state "shutdown" and an
> event is generated from the hypervisor to the toolstack. The toolstack's
> response to this is to actually destroy the domain, that is to tear down
> the resources it is using etc.
> on_* only matter for the destroy phase since they tell the toolstack
> what it should do (restart, preserve, really destroy etc).
Hmm ok, it should be called "--wait_until_halfway" then ;-)
On the more serious side .. would patches be accepted that:
a) differentiate when it returns from waiting based on the on_*
preserve: this could probably stay as is .. after the shutdown event
destroy:
restart:
rename-restart:
coredump-destroy:
coredump-restart:
for the other ones .. i don't know if there actually are events in libxl
that could be 'easily' coupled ?
b) make it possible for the xl commandline to overrule the on_* from the configfile
c) also introduce a -w/--wait for xl destroy
(with b and c, i could emulate "a" by doing a "xl shutdown -w preserve" followed
by a "xl destroy -w".
>> I can see the shutdown state would be the thing to wait for if it's configured
>> with "preserve", but if it's configured with the default "destroy" i would
>> expect it to wait until the guest is actually destroyed. The "restart" is perhaps
>> somewhat more difficult, same goes for the coredump variants.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-04-16 14:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-04-16 14:08 xl shutdown --wait "racy" Sander Eikelenboom
2014-04-16 14:13 ` Ian Campbell
2014-04-16 14:26 ` Sander Eikelenboom
2014-04-16 14:33 ` Ian Campbell
2014-04-16 14:55 ` Sander Eikelenboom [this message]
2014-04-16 15:02 ` Ian Campbell
2014-04-16 15:10 ` George Dunlap
2014-04-16 15:20 ` Sander Eikelenboom
2014-04-16 16:27 ` Ian Campbell
2014-04-16 17:04 ` Sander Eikelenboom
2014-04-17 8:07 ` Ian Campbell
2014-04-16 14:29 ` George Dunlap
2014-04-17 18:09 ` Ian Jackson
2014-04-23 13:38 ` Sander Eikelenboom
2014-04-23 13:42 ` Ian Campbell
2014-04-23 13:49 ` Sander Eikelenboom
2014-04-23 14:12 ` Ian Campbell
2014-04-16 15:19 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2014-04-16 15:21 ` Sander Eikelenboom
2014-04-16 17:08 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1596839466.20140416165555@eikelenboom.it \
--to=linux@eikelenboom.it \
--cc=Ian.Campbell@citrix.com \
--cc=george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com \
--cc=ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xensource.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.