On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 02:34:44PM -0700, Eric Blake wrote: > On 12/01/2013 11:11 PM, Hu Tao wrote: > > This patch adds a new xml element devices/pvpanic to support qemu device > > pvpanic. It can be used to receive guest panic notification. > > > > Signed-off-by: Hu Tao <hutao@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > docs/formatdomain.html.in | 25 +++++++++++++++++ > > src/conf/domain_conf.c | 68 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > src/conf/domain_conf.h | 9 +++++++ > > 3 files changed, 102 insertions(+) > > In addition to Peter's review: > > when sending a series, it helps to include a 0/2 cover letter (git > send-email --cover-letter). > > > > > diff --git a/docs/formatdomain.html.in b/docs/formatdomain.html.in > > index 1850a2b..0a72baa 100644 > > --- a/docs/formatdomain.html.in > > +++ b/docs/formatdomain.html.in > > @@ -5080,6 +5080,31 @@ qemu-kvm -net nic,model=? /dev/null > > </dd> > > </dl> > > > > + <h4><a name="elementsPvpanic">pvpanic device</a></h4> > > pvpanic is a qemu term, but I could see the feasibility of other > hypervisors having a paravirt device with a sole purpose of notifying > the host about panics. Do we want to come up with a more generic name? Give it a generic name is easy, but what about attributes? different hypervisors may have different paravirt devices with different attributes, we can't just mix attributes of unrelated devices into one generic device. Make the devices concrete and accept/reject it if hypervisors recognize it or not is better. -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list