From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Roger Pau Monne Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 00/15] execute hotplug scripts from libxl Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 18:23:52 +0100 Message-ID: <4FFC6528.9000008@citrix.com> References: <1341403176-50715-1-git-send-email-roger.pau@citrix.com> <1341772363.797.2.camel@hastur.hellion.org.uk> <4FFC1294.9040408@citrix.com> <1341935753.8586.48.camel@hastur.hellion.org.uk> <4FFC5339.4060504@citrix.com> <1341939462.8586.74.camel@hastur.hellion.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1341939462.8586.74.camel@hastur.hellion.org.uk> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Ian Campbell Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Ian Campbell wrote: > On Tue, 2012-07-10 at 12:07 -0400, Roger Pau Monne wrote: > >> I'm working on making vfb/vkb async, once that is done I can take a look >> on this, > > Cool. BTW is the other stuff ready? I guess it is waiting on IanJ to > review again? I've changed the series according to your comments, and I'm waiting for IanJ review. I also have NetBSD hotplug & vfb/vkb series ready, that will come after this is committed. If you want I can start posting them, I didn't do so yet because they depend a lot on this. >> but since the device removal is done after Qemu has been killed >> I don't have much expectations that this is going to work (at least for >> the shutdown/destroy case). > > Right, that's an interesting problem. I wonder if qemu should set state > = 5 (or 6?) for all its backends as it does a graceful shutdown? Sorry, what I've said is not accurate. Qemu sets state to "closed" on shutdown/destroy, what doesn't seem to work is the disconnection by setting online to 0 or status to 5 while Qemu is running. Maybe we should not call libxl_device_disk_add/remove when the backend is Qemu for cdrom_insert and instead perform the params remove/addition that you exposed before directly on cdrom_insert. >> The block-attach/detach case might work with this approach. > > Might be good for that case.