lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Mar]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/2 v3] kvm: notify host when guest panicked
On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 11:46:08AM -0700, Eric Northup wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 6:25 AM, Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 03:16:05PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
> > > On 03/14/2012 03:14 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 03:07:46PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
> > > > > 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.
> > > > >
> > > > hypercall can take arguments to achieve the same.
> > >
> > > It has to be designed in advance; and every time we notice something's
> > > missing we have to update the host kernel.
> > >
> >
> > We and in the designed stage now. Not to late to design something flexible
> > :) Panic hypercall can take GPA of a buffer where host puts panic info
> > as a parameter. This buffer can be read by QEMU and passed to management.
> >
>
> If a host kernel change is in the works, I think it might be cleanest to
> have the host kernel export a new kind of VCPU exit for unhandled-by-KVM
> hypercalls. Then usermode can respond to the hypercall as appropriate.
> This would permit adding or changing future hypercalls without host kernel
> changes.
>
There was such vm exit (KVM_EXIT_HYPERCALL), but it was deemed to be a
bad idea.

> "Guest panic" is almost the definition of not-a-fast-path, and so what's
> the reason to handle it in the host kernel.
The only "handling" that kernel does is maps hypercall to panic exit.

>
> Punting to user-space wouldn't be a magic bullet for getting good
> interfaces designed, but in my opinion it is a better place to be doing
> them.

--
Gleb.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-03-15 11:41    [W:0.084 / U:1.136 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site