All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Osier Yang <jyang@redhat.com>
To: "Markus Armbruster" <armbru@redhat.com>,
	"Kevin Wolf" <kwolf@redhat.com>,
	"Anthony Liguori" <aliguori@us.ibm.com>,
	"Eduardo Habkost" <ehabkost@redhat.com>,
	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>,
	"libvir-list@redhat.com" <libvir-list@redhat.com>,
	"Stefan Hajnoczi" <stefanha@gmail.com>,
	qemu-devel@nongnu.org, "Luiz Capitulino" <lcapitulino@redhat.com>,
	"Gerd Hoffmann" <kraxel@redhat.com>,
	laine@redhat.com, "Paolo Bonzini" <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	"Andreas Färber" <afaerber@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] qdev: DEVICE_DELETED event
Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2013 18:37:08 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5139BF54.8000000@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130308092542.GG326424@orkuz.home>

On 2013年03月08日 17:25, Jiri Denemark wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 08, 2013 at 09:50:55 +0100, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>> Osier Yang<jyang@redhat.com>  writes:
>>
>>> I'm wondering if it could be long time to wait for the device_del
>>> completes (AFAIK from previous bugs, it can be, though it should be
>>> fine for most of the cases). If it's too long, it will be a problem
>>> for management, because it looks like hanging. We can have a timeout
>>> for the device_del in libvirt, but the problem is the device_del
>>> can be still in progress by qemu, which could cause the inconsistency.
>>> Unless qemu has some command to cancel the device_del.
>>
>> I'm afraid cancelling isn't possible, at least not for PCI.
>
> I don't think we need anything like that. We just need the device
> deletion API to return immediately without actually removing stuff from
> domain definition (unless the device was really removed fast enough,
> e.g., USB devices are removed before device_del returns) and then remove
> the device from domain definition when we get the event from QEMU or
> when libvirtd reconnects to a domain and sees a particular device is no
> longer present. After all, devices may be removed even if we didn't ask
> for it (when the removal is initiated by a guest OS). And we should also
> provide similar event for higher level apps.

Removing the device from domain config unless we get the event from
qemu or find the device disappeared by polling makes sense. That's
the mainly reason for we want the event and polling actually.

But the problem is our APIs don't want to have long time hanging.
If we don't change the APIs and return quickly just like what we
do currently, it's confused for user, because when he wants to
attach the device again while the device_del is still in progress,
he will get the error like "Device ID *** is in used", however,
our detaching APIs return success prior to that.

I.E, if device_del needs long time to complete in some cases?
can we live with it?

Osier

  reply	other threads:[~2013-03-08 10:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-03-06 13:00 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] qdev: DEVICE_DELETED event Michael S. Tsirkin
2013-03-06 13:57 ` Andreas Färber
2013-03-06 14:13   ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2013-03-07  9:55     ` Markus Armbruster
2013-03-07 10:07       ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2013-03-07 13:11         ` Andreas Färber
2013-03-07 14:14           ` Markus Armbruster
2013-03-07 16:35             ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2013-03-07 17:23               ` Markus Armbruster
2013-03-07 18:12                 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2013-03-07 19:00                   ` Andreas Färber
2013-03-07 19:15                     ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2013-03-08  7:09                       ` Osier Yang
2013-03-08  8:50                         ` Markus Armbruster
2013-03-08  9:25                           ` Jiri Denemark
2013-03-08 10:37                             ` Osier Yang [this message]
2013-03-08 10:56                           ` Osier Yang
2013-03-08 11:58                             ` Markus Armbruster
2013-03-07 20:18                   ` Markus Armbruster
2013-03-07 20:29                     ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2013-03-06 14:44 ` Eric Blake
2013-03-06 14:50   ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2013-03-06 14:52   ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-03-06 15:41     ` Eric Blake
2013-03-07  9:38       ` Markus Armbruster

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=5139BF54.8000000@redhat.com \
    --to=jyang@redhat.com \
    --cc=afaerber@suse.de \
    --cc=aliguori@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=armbru@redhat.com \
    --cc=ehabkost@redhat.com \
    --cc=kraxel@redhat.com \
    --cc=kwolf@redhat.com \
    --cc=laine@redhat.com \
    --cc=lcapitulino@redhat.com \
    --cc=libvir-list@redhat.com \
    --cc=mst@redhat.com \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    --cc=stefanha@gmail.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.