From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:34735)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mst@redhat.com>) id 1VbvZG-0004bY-2O
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 31 Oct 2013 12:58:04 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mst@redhat.com>) id 1VbvZA-0002su-3y
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 31 Oct 2013 12:57:57 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:1852)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mst@redhat.com>) id 1VbvZ9-0002sq-Rt
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 31 Oct 2013 12:57:52 -0400
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2013 19:00:33 +0200
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <20131031170033.GA10925@redhat.com>
References: <20131031150955.GE9948@redhat.com> <52727695.8080007@redhat.com>
	<20131031154556.GB10424@redhat.com> <52727D97.3070209@redhat.com>
	<20131031161404.GA10710@redhat.com> <52728294.9050305@redhat.com>
	<20131031162652.GA10789@redhat.com> <52728790.7010404@redhat.com>
	<20131031164828.GA10862@redhat.com> <52728ABB.2030808@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <52728ABB.2030808@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] pvpanic plans?
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: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: pkrempa@redhat.com, lersek@redhat.com, marcel.a@redhat.com, libvir-list@redhat.com, Hu Tao <hutao@cn.fujitsu.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, armbru@redhat.com, rhod@redhat.com, kraxel@redhat.com, anthony@codemonkey.ws, lcapitulino@redhat.com, afaerber@suse.de

On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 05:52:11PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 31/10/2013 17:48, Michael S. Tsirkin ha scritto:
> > But code duplication is bad.
> 
> So should we make a table of IO_ERROR-like states to avoid code
> duplication?  You have to draw a line somewhere...
> 
> > I think IO error for example
> > is broken in that you can't pause but can run then pause.
> > Seems strange.
> 
> "cont" moves you out of IO_ERROR.  IO_ERROR is already a non-running
> state (all states except RUNNING are non-running), "stop" is a no-op in
> non-running states.  I don't like it that much either, but it works.
> 
> Paolo

Interesting.  Why do we have
-    { RUN_STATE_INTERNAL_ERROR, RUN_STATE_PAUSED },
then?