On 2 December 2014 at 15:01, Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 11:10:14PM +0000, Peter Maydell wrote: >> Also, the clarification we want here should not I think be architecture >> specific -- the handling of the exit system event in QEMU is in common >> code. What you want to say is something like: >> >> "Valid values for 'type' are: >> KVM_SYSTEM_EVENT_SHUTDOWN -- the guest has requested a shutdown of the >> VM. Userspace is not obliged to honour this, and if it does honour >> this does not need to destroy the VM synchronously (ie it may call >> KVM_RUN again before shutdown finally occurs). >> KVM_SYSTEM_EVENT_RESET -- the guest has requested a reset of the VM. >> As with SHUTDOWN, userspace is permitted to ignore the request, or >> to schedule the reset to occur in the future and may call KVM_RUN again." > > ok, this is pretty good, but do we need to say that userspace is > permitted to do this or that? The kernel never relies on user space for > correct functionality, so do you mean 'for the run a vm semantics to > still otherwise be functional'? I meant "permitted" in the sense of "the kernel won't kill the VM, return errnos to subsequent KVM_RUN requests or otherwise treat this userspace behaviour as buggy". If you want to rephrase it somehow I don't object, as long as the docs make it clear that it's a valid implementation strategy for userspace to do that. -- PMM -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
