From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Anthony Liguori Subject: Re: Domain save/migrate issue Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 10:26:24 -0600 Message-ID: <43F35630.6070507@us.ibm.com> References: <64F9B87B6B770947A9F8391472E0321603494ADD@ehost011-8.exch011.intermedia.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <64F9B87B6B770947A9F8391472E0321603494ADD@ehost011-8.exch011.intermedia.net> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Noam Taich Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Noam Taich wrote: > Ok. So pause ALONE is not possible. But I didn't mean I'd do only a > pause: > > Suspend writes all the info you just mentioned. And the save code just > writes the info that suspend left for it. > So, lets tackle the problem in xen and/or the host. > > If a change was entered into the suspend code, say, a special mode, > "pseudoSuspend" was added, in which the function writes all that same > info > Why exactly would this be better than just making domain's unsuspendable? All it would take is some hypervisor plumbing... Regards, Anthony Liguori > Into that very same place it wrote to before (or any other cozy spot we > can access from the save function), but does NOT actually suspend the > domain > (Ideally, it would suspend nothing. But, if necessary, it can resume > everything instead of calling the actual shutdown code). > > The save function doesn't need to know anything now that it didn't know > before... > > >