Re: [Xen-devel] [libvirt] [PATCH] libxl: support ACPI shutdown flag

[Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 2014-04-29 at 11:01 +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 10:53:00AM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > On Tue, 2014-04-29 at 10:06 +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > > IIUC  libxl_domain_shutdown() will use the Xen paravirt channel
> > > to trigger a controlled shutdown in the guest. Currently we have
> > > the following flags defined
> > > 
> > >     VIR_DOMAIN_SHUTDOWN_DEFAULT        = 0,        /* hypervisor choice */
> > >     VIR_DOMAIN_SHUTDOWN_ACPI_POWER_BTN = (1 << 0), /* Send ACPI event */
> > >     VIR_DOMAIN_SHUTDOWN_GUEST_AGENT    = (1 << 1), /* Use guest agent */
> > >     VIR_DOMAIN_SHUTDOWN_INITCTL        = (1 << 2), /* Use initctl */
> > >     VIR_DOMAIN_SHUTDOWN_SIGNAL         = (1 << 3), /* Send a signal */
> > > 
> > > None of those really map to the Xen paravirt shutdown
> > 
> > It's not a million miles away from VIR_DOMAIN_SHUTDOWN_GUEST_AGENT if
> > you consider the bit of the kernel which responds to the paravirt
> > shutdown request as an agent of sorts. With Windows PV drivers I think
> > this is even literally a userspace component.
> > 
> > Not that having a more explicit type is a bad idea, but I thought I'd
> > mention it.
> 
> I guess my rationale for suggesting a new flag is that it is conceivable
> that Xen could support the virtio-console devices, in which case it would
> be possible for someone to configure a Xen guest with the QEMU (or another)
> guest agent provided shutdown facility. In such a scenario, it'd thus be
> desirable for the API to be able to distinguish Xen paravirt control from
> the guest agent.

That makes sense.

Ian.


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