On 12/14/2017 05:53 PM, Jim Fehlig wrote: > On 12/14/2017 12:15 AM, Michal Privoznik wrote: >> On 12/13/2017 10:41 PM, Jim Fehlig wrote: >>> A Xen domain0 is better described as a persistent domain. Mark it >>> as such during intialization. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Jim Fehlig <jfehlig@xxxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> >>> I noticed this while debugging a libvirt-guests issue. The list_guests() >>> function filters domain0 with >>> >>> echo "$list" | grep -v 00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000 >>> >>> If domain0 is the only item in $list, the grep returns 1, causing >>> a failure of the stop operation when action is suspend. This >>> patch fixes the libvirt-guests issue, but I can also send a patch >>> to improve the filter if desired. E.g. >>> >>> echo "$list" | sed "s/00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000//g" >>> >>> src/libxl/libxl_driver.c | 1 + >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/src/libxl/libxl_driver.c b/src/libxl/libxl_driver.c >>> index 40328a6cb..79e29ce07 100644 >>> --- a/src/libxl/libxl_driver.c >>> +++ b/src/libxl/libxl_driver.c >>> @@ -609,6 +609,7 @@ libxlAddDom0(libxlDriverPrivatePtr driver) >>> def = NULL; >>> + vm->persistent = 1; >>> virDomainObjSetState(vm, VIR_DOMAIN_RUNNING, >>> VIR_DOMAIN_RUNNING_BOOTED); >>> if (virDomainDefSetVcpusMax(vm->def, d_info.vcpu_max_id + 1, >>> driver->xmlopt)) >>> goto cleanup; >>> >> >> I think this is orthogonal to libvirt-guests fix. dom0 should be marked >> as persistent because it is persistent. I mean, even though we don't >> store its config anywhere, we can't really get rid of it (udefine && >> destroy). > > Right, that's why I didn't mention libvirt-guests in the commit message. > Is it ok to push this patch and send another for the libvirt-guests > improvement? Oh right. Sorry, I forgot to write it explicitly: ACK. Michal -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
