From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 COLOPre 03/13] libxc/restore: zero ioreq
 page only one time
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2015 10:49:02 +0100
Message-ID: <5575650E.6050807@citrix.com>
References: <1433734997-26570-1-git-send-email-yanghy@cn.fujitsu.com>
	<1433734997-26570-4-git-send-email-yanghy@cn.fujitsu.com>
	<55756468.4090500@citrix.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <55756468.4090500@citrix.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Yang Hongyang <yanghy@cn.fujitsu.com>, xen-devel@lists.xen.org
Cc: wei.liu2@citrix.com, ian.campbell@citrix.com, wency@cn.fujitsu.com, guijianfeng@cn.fujitsu.com, yunhong.jiang@intel.com, eddie.dong@intel.com, rshriram@cs.ubc.ca, ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 08/06/15 10:46, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 08/06/15 04:43, Yang Hongyang wrote:
>> ioreq page contains evtchn which will be set when we resume the
>> secondary vm the first time. The hypervisor will check if the
>> evtchn is corrupted, so we cannot zero the ioreq page more
>> than one time.
>>
>> The ioreq->state is always STATE_IOREQ_NONE after the vm is
>> suspended, so it is OK if we only zero it one time.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Yang Hongyang <yanghy@cn.fujitsu.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Wen congyang <wency@cn.fujitsu.com>
>> CC: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
> The issue here is that we are running the restore algorithm over a
> domain which has already been running in Xen for a while.  This is a
> brand new usecase, as far as I am aware.
>
> Does the qemu process associated with this domain get frozen while the
> secondary is being reset, or does the process get destroyed and recreated.
>
> I have a gut feeling that it would be safer to clear all of the page
> other than the event channel, but that depends on exactly what else is
> going on.  We absolutely don't want to do is have an update to this page
> from the primary with an in-progress IOREQ.

Or actually worse, an update from the primary with a different event
channel in it.  There is no requirement or guarantee that the bufioreq
event channels are the same on either side.

~Andrew