From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Gerd Hoffmann Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/6] save/restore on Xen Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 11:21:41 +0100 Message-ID: <4F1E8635.2020608@redhat.com> References: <4F19AB66.8060901@siemens.com> <4F1D4974.4090003@siemens.com> <4F1D4E43.7000501@siemens.com> <4F1D80BA.1040504@siemens.com> <4F1D9546.4040801@siemens.com> <4F1D9649.1000102@codemonkey.ws> <4F1D995A.4020604@siemens.com> <4F1D9A8E.1080102@codemonkey.ws> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4F1D9A8E.1080102@codemonkey.ws> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+gceq-qemu-devel=gmane.org@nongnu.org Sender: qemu-devel-bounces+gceq-qemu-devel=gmane.org@nongnu.org To: Anthony Liguori Cc: Jan Kiszka , "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" , Avi Kivity , Stefano Stabellini , "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Hi, >>> We really should view RAM as just another device so I don't like the >>> idea of >>> propagating a global concept of "when RAM is restored" because that >>> treats it >>> specially compared to other devices. >>> >>> But viewing RAM as just another device, having Xen only restore a >>> subset of >>> devices should be a reasonable thing to do moving forward. I don't think modeling device memory (i.e. vga vram) as something independent from the device (vga) is a good idea. Because it isn't. >> To my understanding, QXL will break identically on Xen for the same >> reason: the reset handler assumes it can deal with the VRAM as it likes. Yes. Some data structures for host <-> guest communication are living in device memory, and a reset initializes these. > QXL also has a VGA BIOS that it could use to initialize VRAM. A similar > change could be made for it. Hmm. Not sure this is a good idea. cheers, Gerd