On 03/14/2012 01:11 PM, Wen Congyang wrote: > > > > I don't think we want to use the driver. Instead, have a small piece of > > code that resets the device and pushes out a string (the panic message?) > > without any interrupts etc. > > > > It's still going to be less reliable than a hypercall, I agree. > > Do you still want to use complicated and less reliable way? Are you willing to try it out and see how complicated it really is? While it's more complicated, it's also more flexible. You can communicate the panic message, whether the guest is attempting a kdump and its own recovery or whether it wants the host to do it, etc., you can communicate less severe failures like oopses. > I think the other ones prefer to touch the hypervisor. I understand the sentiment. Your patches are simple and easy. But my feeling is that the kernel has become too complicated already and I'm looking for ways to limit changes. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function -- 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
