From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=42311 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OoXeo-0007ME-KA
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 26 Aug 2010 04:18:00 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <amit.shah@redhat.com>) id 1OoXen-0002Vt-Gi
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 26 Aug 2010 04:17:58 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:36763)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <amit.shah@redhat.com>) id 1OoXen-0002Vc-9K
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 26 Aug 2010 04:17:57 -0400
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2010 13:47:50 +0530
From: Amit Shah <amit.shah@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH V2] balloon: Don't try fetching info if
	machine is stopped
Message-ID: <20100826081750.GK18351@amit-laptop.redhat.com>
References: <8450ea8e785c9049f0b3edddc01650a8c4b9ffe7.1282265244.git.amit.shah@redhat.com>
	<4C719C7E.6030606@codemonkey.ws>
	<20100826060513.GF18351@amit-laptop.redhat.com>
	<4C762058.8070301@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4C762058.8070301@redhat.com>
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: agl@us.ibm.com, qemu list <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>

On (Thu) Aug 26 2010 [10:05:44], Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 08/26/2010 08:05 AM, Amit Shah wrote:
> >This is what I have currently. It would need some timer handling in
> >the save/load case as well, right?
> 
> When loading you won't have any pending "info balloon" command, so I
> think the timer need not be preserved across migration.
> 
> Also, 5 seconds for a stopped guest is actually a lot,

That's the problem; it's policy. Where and how to specify it?

> so maybe
> Amit's original patch or a variant thereof would make sense anyway.

This seems to be needed though -- as Anthony mentioned, a guest which
has oopsed or similar, incapable of servicing the stats request, is
going to block the monitor command from returning forever.

So it's better to have a timeout, just that we need to decide how much
it should be.

		Amit