From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B3490C54E4A for ; Fri, 8 Mar 2024 08:42:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1riVo6-0007ow-Hi; Fri, 08 Mar 2024 03:42:22 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1riVo4-0007oJ-Kn for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 08 Mar 2024 03:42:20 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.133.124]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1riVo1-0004yQ-4o for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 08 Mar 2024 03:42:19 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1709887336; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references; bh=mHoCI7HR7epTmwUO5oBzQnEGpfByQ4DgEOE1WWZH3Jg=; b=M6utAfauic+kZ9GUEbEg+YZmWj5Ap33XE4cOdo9dQ8noTey+mSz0fOEtQGXH8cWIWS5PM9 Jinfrkq3TRiN0YjaEX8dcdcsjkzREHXycbAUPKfZqUKclEkgh3BxIPl9bUE5lshoJE5wp4 yHPJXe+FROOv5asEXe93vKhetTPunXA= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast-mx02.redhat.com [66.187.233.88]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-122-MFm7Znc3MSaJe9R1Mq3lqA-1; Fri, 08 Mar 2024 03:42:12 -0500 X-MC-Unique: MFm7Znc3MSaJe9R1Mq3lqA-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.5]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 284C88F1F17; Fri, 8 Mar 2024 08:42:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from redhat.com (unknown [10.42.28.78]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8034B10E4F; Fri, 8 Mar 2024 08:42:10 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2024 08:42:08 +0000 From: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= To: Justinien Bouron Cc: armbru@redhat.com, eblake@redhat.com, eduardo@habkost.net, kraxel@redhat.com, marcandre.lureau@redhat.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] input-linux: Add option to not grab a device upon guest startup Message-ID: References: <20240308033827.2835989-1-justinien.bouron@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20240308033827.2835989-1-justinien.bouron@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/2.2.12 (2023-09-09) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.4.1 on 10.11.54.5 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=170.10.133.124; envelope-from=berrange@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -26 X-Spam_score: -2.7 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.7 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.583, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org On Thu, Mar 07, 2024 at 07:38:27PM -0800, Justinien Bouron wrote: > > This last two lines doesn't make sense to me. Isn't the grab > > toggling entirely in control of the QEMU process, regardless > > of what state the guest is at ? > > Actually, you're right, they do not make sense. This issue of having the guest > taking a while to start and the toggle keys not working, only seem to appear > when running the VM under libvirt. I was not able to reproduce this issue when > running qemu directly from the command line. So either this is a libvirt issue > or something related to my setup (VFIO with GPU passthrough, so a lot can go > wrong). > > Should I send a new version of the patch with an updated commit message that > does not mention this issue? If that probem does not exist, what is the compelling reason to add this patch ? With regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|