[lkml]   [2019]   [Dec]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/4] xenbus: move xenbus_dev_shutdown() into frontend code...
On 09.12.19 12:55, Durrant, Paul wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Jürgen Groß <>
>> Sent: 09 December 2019 11:34
>> To: Durrant, Paul <>;;
>> Cc: Boris Ostrovsky <>; Stefano Stabellini
>> <>
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] xenbus: move xenbus_dev_shutdown() into frontend
>> code...
>> On 05.12.19 15:01, Paul Durrant wrote:
>>> ...and make it static
>>> xenbus_dev_shutdown() is seemingly intended to cause clean shutdown of
>> PV
>>> frontends when a guest is rebooted. Indeed the function waits for a
>>> conpletion which is only set by a call to xenbus_frontend_closed().
>>> This patch removes the shutdown() method from backends and moves
>>> xenbus_dev_shutdown() from xenbus_probe.c into xenbus_probe_frontend.c,
>>> renaming it appropriately and making it static.
>> Is this a good move considering driver domains?
> I don't think it can have ever worked properly for driver domains, and with the rest of the patches a backend should be able go away and return unannounced (as long as the domain id is kept... for which patches need to be upstreamed into Xen).
>> At least I'd expect the commit message addressing the expected behavior
>> with rebooting a driver domain and why this patch isn't making things
>> worse.
> For a clean reboot I'd expect the toolstack to shut down the protocol before rebooting the driver domain, so the backend shutdown method is moot. And I don't believe re-startable driver domains were something that ever made it into support (because of the non-persistent domid problem). I can add something to the commit comment to that effect if you'd like.

Yes, please do so.

With this you can add my:

Reviewed-by: Juergen Gross <>


 \ /
  Last update: 2019-12-09 12:58    [W:0.054 / U:0.484 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site