From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:42833)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <lcapitulino@redhat.com>) id 1SeR2V-0002I7-BP
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 12 Jun 2012 09:21:52 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <lcapitulino@redhat.com>) id 1SeR2L-0001Rd-2E
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 12 Jun 2012 09:21:42 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:6593)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <lcapitulino@redhat.com>) id 1SeR2K-0001Qo-Qz
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 12 Jun 2012 09:21:33 -0400
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2012 10:21:45 -0300
From: Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <20120612102145.6a21608a@doriath.home>
In-Reply-To: <20120612124045.GK10153@redhat.com>
References: <4FB9E4CE.8060709@cn.fujitsu.com> <4FB9E5CB.2020208@cn.fujitsu.com>
	<20120530162314.1e9e4d3c@doriath.home>
	<4FD6E7E9.4090408@cn.fujitsu.com>
	<20120612093504.1f7e24f1@doriath.home>
	<20120612124045.GK10153@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/3] deal with guest panicked event
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/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: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: "Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@redhat.com>
Cc: kvm list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>, qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>

On Tue, 12 Jun 2012 13:40:45 +0100
"Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@redhat.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 09:35:04AM -0300, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
> > On Tue, 12 Jun 2012 14:55:37 +0800
> > Wen Congyang <wency@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > >> +static void panicked_perform_action(void)
> > > >> +{
> > > >> +    switch(panicked_action) {
> > > >> +    case PANICKED_REPORT:
> > > >> +        panicked_mon_event("report");
> > > >> +        break;
> > > >> +
> > > >> +    case PANICKED_PAUSE:
> > > >> +        panicked_mon_event("pause");
> > > >> +        vm_stop(RUN_STATE_GUEST_PANICKED);
> > > >> +        break;
> > > >> +
> > > >> +    case PANICKED_QUIT:
> > > >> +        panicked_mon_event("quit");
> > > >> +        exit(0);
> > > >> +        break;
> > > >> +    }
> > > > 
> > > > Having the data argument is not needed/wanted. The mngt app can guess it if it
> > > > needs to know it, but I think it doesn't want to.
> > > 
> > > Libvirt will do something when the kernel is panicked, so it should know the action
> > > in qemu side.
> > 
> > But the action will be set by libvirt itself, no?
> 
> Sure, but the whole world isn't libvirt. If the process listening to the
> monitor is not the same as the process which launched the VM, then I
> think including the action is worthwhile. Besides, the way Wen has done
> this is identical to what we already do with QEVENT_WATCHDOG and I think
> it is desirable to keep consistency here.

That's right, I had forgotten about the WATCHDOG event. Maybe it would
make more sense to have this info in a query- command though, specially if
we plan to have a command to change that setting.

But I won't oppose having it in the event.