On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 06:43:13PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > The pvpanic mess is even bigger than anticipated. Let's fix the monitor's > behavior (patch 1), get rid of all traces that the broken pvpanic existed > (patch 2), and give it a new name so that libvirt can detect a design > that works (patch 3). > > All downstreams are urged to apply patches 1+2 as soon as they are > merged in QEMU. > > Still, there are still other problems to solve. > > In QEMU, exposing "-device isa-pvpanic" in the ACPI tables. Quite frankly > I don't have the time to fix this. We have ~3 months though. Patch 3 > should not be applied until it is fixed. > > Also, libvirt needs to know under which circumstances to add "-device > isa-pvpanic", besides obviously the availability of the device. > > IMHO it is just too complicated to retrofit all complications in > <on_crash>. In fact, I suspect <on_crash> would match more closely QEMU's > "internal error" state, and it would be quite useful to add that to the > QEMU driver. > > Thus, libvirt could add support for an <on_panic> element with the > following values: No, <on_crash> is the right thing to be using for this from libvirt's pov & I don't think we should invent something new. The <on_crash> element has always been intended to represent handling of guest panics, not qemu internal errors. Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :| -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list