On 12/03/2013 11:31 PM, Hu Tao wrote:
>
> pvpanic is a qemu term, but I could see the feasibility of other
> hypervisors having a paravirt device with a sole purpose of notifying
> the host about panics. Do we want to come up with a more generic name?
Give it a generic name is easy, but what about attributes? different
hypervisors may have different paravirt devices with different
attributes, we can't just mix attributes of unrelated devices into one
generic device. Make the devices concrete and accept/reject it if
hypervisors recognize it or not is better.
Then do what we've done in the past - separate the presence of a type of
device from the driver-specific attributes, something like:
<devices>
<panic>
<driver type='qemu' ioport='0x505'/>
</panic>
...
where we use the type='' field of <driver> to toggle between a
discriminated union of any other per-hypervisor specific attributes. By
default, you don't need a <driver> subelement; requesting <panic/> is
sufficient to use the defaults for the current hypervisor.
Dan, do you have any thoughts on the best representation to use? Or is
Hu's original proposal of:
<pvpanic ioport='0x505'/>
sufficient?
--
Eric Blake eblake redhat com +1-919-301-3266
Libvirt virtualization library
http://libvirt.org