On Thu, Nov 05, 2015 at 16:54:02 +0300, Dmitry Andreev wrote: > > > On 05.11.2015 14:06, Jiri Denemark wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 13:23:32 +0300, Dmitry Andreev wrote: > >> Add crash CPU feature for Hyper-V. Hyper-V crash MSR's can be used > >> by Hyper-V based guests to notify about occurred guest crash. > >> > >> XML: > >> <features> > >> <hyperv> > >> <crash state='on'/> > >> </hyperv> > >> </features> > > Sounds like this is related to an existing panic device we already > > support. So what does enabling hv_crash do in QEMU? Is it an additional > > channel to a panic device or is the panic device still needed even if > > hv_crash is enabled? In any case, I think we should map this somehow to > > the panic device instead of copying 1:1 the way QEMU enables hv_crash. > pvpanic and Hyper-V crash are independent ways for guest to notify about > OS crash. Both ways rise the 'qemu guest panicked' event. Domain can > have both hv_crash and pvpanic enabled at the same time. > > pvpanic is in <devices> section in domain configuration because it is an > ISA device. Hyper-V crash is a hypervisor's feature, which enables a set > of model-specific registers. Guest can use this registers to send > notification and store additional information about a crash. This is a > part of Microsoft hypervisor interface. Device or not, I don't really like having two distinct places to configure similar functionality. <device> <panic model='hyperv'/> will do just fine IMO. > > That's why I think hv_crash should be in <features> section. > > Just to make it clear, NACK until the design is sorted out. I concur. Peter
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list