Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v6 1/3] libxc: introduce XC_SAVE_ID_TOOLSTACK

[Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, 12 Apr 2012, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-04-12 at 12:58 +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > On Thu, 12 Apr 2012, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > > Stefano Stabellini writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v6 1/3] libxc: 
> > > introduce XC_SAVE_ID_TOOLSTACK"):
> > > > On Tue, 3 Apr 2012, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > > ...
> > > > > Although I do have one comment: are you sure it's appropriate that the
> > > > > "toolstack data" is silently thrown away if the restore caller doesn't
> > > > > supply the relevant callback ?
> > > > 
> > > > We should print a warning in that case and try to continue
> > > 
> > > Why is it not appropriate to bomb out ?  I am not a fan of warnings
> > > (which end up dumped to some ignored logfile) for things which might
> > > be critical problems.
> >  
> > because there is a significant chance that the guest will resume
> > correctly anyway (it depends on the guest status and the VM config)
> 
> But there is some non-zero chance that it won't, in which case we've
> just silently killed the destination VM and told the source machine that
> everything is OK, so it won't resume the original. That's not good. I
> think we should propagate the error here.

OK

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel