[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] [libvirt] [PATCH] qemu: Fix shutdown regression
From: |
Kevin Wolf |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] [libvirt] [PATCH] qemu: Fix shutdown regression |
Date: |
Wed, 21 Sep 2011 12:30:19 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:6.0.2) Gecko/20110906 Thunderbird/6.0.2 |
Am 20.09.2011 20:01, schrieb Eric Blake:
> On 09/20/2011 11:39 AM, Jiri Denemark wrote:
>> The commit that prevents disk corruption on domain shutdown
>> (96fc4784177ecb70357518fa863442455e45ad0e) causes regression with QEMU
>> 0.14.* and 0.15.* because of a regression bug in QEMU that was fixed
>> only recently in QEMU git. With affected QEMU binaries, domains cannot
>> be shutdown properly and stay in a paused state. This patch tries to
>> avoid this by sending SIGKILL to 0.1[45].* QEMU processes. Though we
>> wait a bit more between sending SIGTERM and SIGKILL to reduce the
>> possibility of virtual disk corruption.
I really think libvirt should never SIGKILL qemu unless it's explicitly
told so. Management tools should try to ask the user before doing so.
Killing qemu with SIGKILL is never safe.
>> ---
>> src/qemu/qemu_capabilities.c | 7 +++++++
>> src/qemu/qemu_capabilities.h | 1 +
>> src/qemu/qemu_process.c | 19 +++++++++++++------
>> 3 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> ACK. But it would be nice if upstream qemu could give us a more
> reliable indication of whether the qemu SIGTERM bug is fixed, so that we
> don't corrupt data on a patched 0.14 or 0.15 qemu.
0.14 shouldn't have this bug, but it looks like 0.15 has it.
Justin, can you cherry-pick d9389b96 and 941f511a into stable-0.15 in
order to fix -no-shutdown?
Kevin