From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1N2Ged-0006Sf-Bc for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 25 Oct 2009 23:53:59 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1N2GeZ-0006SD-0m for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 25 Oct 2009 23:53:58 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=40150 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1N2GeY-0006S2-Nw for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 25 Oct 2009 23:53:54 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:64798) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1N2GeY-0002tr-83 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 25 Oct 2009 23:53:54 -0400 Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 09:23:12 +0530 From: Amit Shah Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] char: emit the OPENED event only when a new char connection is opened Message-ID: <20091026035312.GB11416@amit-x200.redhat.com> References: <1254920477-4645-1-git-send-email-amit.shah@redhat.com> <1254920477-4645-2-git-send-email-amit.shah@redhat.com> <1254920477-4645-3-git-send-email-amit.shah@redhat.com> <1254920477-4645-4-git-send-email-amit.shah@redhat.com> <4AE2D8C6.7070802@web.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4AE2D8C6.7070802@web.de> List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Jan Kiszka Cc: Anthony Liguori , qemu-devel@nongnu.org On (Sat) Oct 24 2009 [12:36:54], Jan Kiszka wrote: > Amit Shah wrote: > > The OPENED event gets sent also when qemu resets its state initially. > > The consumers of the event aren't interested in receiving this event > > on reset. > > The monitor was. Now its initial prompt on activation is broken. The patch in Anthony's queue, titled 'console: call qemu_chr_reset() in text_console_init' fixed that. However, with the qcow2 synchronous patch, the monitor prompt doesn't come up again -- which shows there is a problem with the way the bhs work and also the initial resets. I think the initial resets are a hack to work around something from my reading of it; do you have a better idea of why it's there and how it's all supposed to work? > Does this patch fix/improve something for a different user? If not, > please let us revert it. There's another question too: is a separate 'reset' event needed in addition to an 'opened' event? I have a few apps (that are coming as part of the virtio-console work) that need just an 'opened' event and are not interested in the 'reset' event. Amit