From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=59898 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OpzH4-0005Xd-Kx for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2010 03:59:27 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OpzH3-0007of-CG for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2010 03:59:26 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:60481) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OpzH3-0007oG-4y for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2010 03:59:25 -0400 Message-ID: <4C7B64D7.2020703@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2010 10:59:19 +0300 From: Avi Kivity MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 0/5] RFC: distinguish warm reset from cold reset. List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Isaku Yamahata Cc: blauwirbel@gmail.com, alex.williamson@redhat.com, glommer@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org On 08/30/2010 10:49 AM, Isaku Yamahata wrote: > This patch set distinguish warm reset from cold reset by > introducing warm reset callback handler. > The first 4 patches are trivial clean up patches. The last patch of 5/5 > is RFC patch. > > The following thread arose cold reset vs warm reset issues. > http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2010-08/msg00186.html > The summary is > - warm reset is wanted in qemu > - Pressing the reset button is a warm reset on real machines > - Sparc64 CPU uses different reset vector for warm and cold reset, > so system_reset acts like a reset button > - Bus reset can be implemented utilizing qdev frame work instead of > implemeting it each bus layer independently. > - The modification should be incremental. > Anthony would like to see that as an incremental addition to what we have > today (like introducing a propagating warm reset callback) and thinking > through what the actual behavior should and shouldn't be. > > > If the direction is okay, The next step would be a patch(set) for qdev which > would introduce qdev_cold_reset(), qdev_warm_reset(), > DeviceInfo::cold_reset and DeviceInfo::warm_reset > and would obsolete qdev_reset() and DeviceInfo::reset. > What would be the difference between warm and cold reset? Former called on any reset, while the latter called on power up only? -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function