Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0 of 5] xl shutdown compatibility with xm

[Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 2012-10-15 at 12:21 +0100, Sander Eikelenboom wrote:
> Monday, October 15, 2012, 12:37:57 PM, you wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, 2012-10-15 at 11:32 +0100, Sander Eikelenboom wrote:
> >> Hi Ian,
> >> 
> >> Great thanks !
> >> Only thing i was wondering about:
> >> 
> >> Shouldn't the "-F" option be dropped in favour of always trying the
> >> "acpi fallback" when the pv shutdown fails.
> >> 
> >> This because the shutdown scripts still don't work for domains without
> >> pv shutdown and i don't see a down side to just trying that as
> >> fallback.
> 
> > It is guess OS dependent what the ACPI button press event does, it can
> > reboot, shutdown or hibernate etc depending on the OS type and its
> > configuration. (in theory I suppose it is completely arbitrary e.g. it
> > could be configured to eject the CD-ROM or something equally random).
> 
> > Therefore the user needs to be aware of when they can safely use it.
> 
> Well yes and no:
>     - can't remember having (to make) that choice with xm ?

Looks like xend uses SCHEDOP_remote_shutdown. It's unclear to me why
this is better than just shooting the domain with destroy...

>     - On shutdown with xl as toolstack and when the guest doesn't
> support pv shutdown, the init.d/xendomains script doesn't even attempt
> to shutdown this guest by acpi fallback.
>     - As a result when using xl as toolstack, the guest is terminated
> non gracefully when the whole machine finally shutsdown, which seems
> less desirable then at least *trying* to shut it down gracefully by
> using the acpi button.

Using the ACPI fallback is a decision which can only be made locally
with full knowledge of the configuration of the guests.

Ian.


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