From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Keir Fraser Subject: Re: poweroff in 3.2 and 3.3 Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 13:21:50 +0000 Message-ID: References: <49242037.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <49242037.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Jan Beulich , xen-devel@lists.xensource.com Cc: "Tian, Kevin" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 19/11/08 13:18, "Jan Beulich" wrote: > The hypervisor appears to make the assumption that all but the vCPU > XENPF_enter_acpi_sleep is being called on are down (in 3.2 because the > sender of the event check IPI assumes the remote CPU is idle, in 3.3 by > and explicit check in __cpu_disable() - here we also have an incorrect > comment stating that this path can only be used when entering S3). > > I can't, however, see how this would be guaranteed on the kernel side > (and apart from that I don't think the hypervisor should be dependent on > kernel behavior here, even if it's dom0). Shouldn't therefore > freeze_domains() not only freeze all DomU-s, but also all non-current > vCPU-s of Dom0? Kevin Tian is probably best placed to answer this. I'm happy to see this added if he agrees. -- Keir