 Home |
Products |
Support |
Community |
News |
xen-devel
[Xen-devel] Re: force option of xm block-detach
| To: | Keir Fraser <keir.xen@xxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | [Xen-devel] Re: force option of xm block-detach |
| From: | Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Mon, 21 Mar 2011 14:42:22 +0100 |
| Cc: | James Harper <james.harper@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xen devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Delivery-date: | Mon, 21 Mar 2011 06:43:00 -0700 |
| Dkim-signature: | v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:sender:message-id:date:from:user-agent :mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=W6/zKLE7hAg6pTyL65Mfyf4kCws4nuNjLZDPSb/YSXE=; b=r+EdxPIpLTUxE3KCUsHpRwq9/ci0xtg/TrzeSibsBto8BTXMNqliCzzhp1FbkpEUdO U/H3T9c9jpFR32uAvocjlW+PVv2Jd7O4du0+0C3Vj/XDuaHPsm+QSlOjYhN1fHk62qof LZMJ8oEpQ7h3g3fBM2MQFZJMwiX6uS5MiheYM= |
| Domainkey-signature: | a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=sender:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=rBuumWBpqX9JxlTrhLQZgkczHqqC5Z9OJcVWtTaMTncnGi/LjQj5pgSlAjUERU5g9i Tl7MsQIucCuReAj3zoHW1Nws6l5DAQ5rKHetZCBXp1MZdf+0Jn8YNKQfzfftOkCguSDa gK4fKio6LLdaQtSouDq7NEmUJJ4Il6wc7xd8A= |
| Envelope-to: | www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <C9ACBC6D.151DE%keir.xen@xxxxxxxxx> |
| List-help: | <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help> |
| List-id: | Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com> |
| List-post: | <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com> |
| List-subscribe: | <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe> |
| List-unsubscribe: | <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe> |
| References: | <AEC6C66638C05B468B556EA548C1A77D01CC816F@trantor> <C9ACBC6D.151DE%keir.xen@xxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101209 Fedora/3.1.7-0.35.b3pre.fc14 Lightning/1.0b3pre Mnenhy/0.8.3 Thunderbird/3.1.7 |
On 03/21/2011 09:27 AM, Keir Fraser wrote: > How does the 'force' option to block-detach differ to not using it? Can > DomU PV drivers tell if this is a forceful detach request?I believe it means after a timeout we will simply delete the xenstore info relating to the VBD, rather than wait an arbitrary time for the xenbus connection to get driven into disconnected state. Thus it's not something that is made visible to frontend/backend drivers. That's correct, the drivers just see it as a transition to XenbusStateUnknown. Paolo _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [Xen-devel] pvops0 kernel 2.6.32.x still does not boot if x > 18, shouldn't that be fixed for release of Xen 4.0.2/4.1, Andreas Kinzler |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC] x86: possible problem with guest_walk_tables(), Tim Deegan |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [Xen-devel] force option of xm block-detach, Keir Fraser |
| Next by Thread: | [Xen-devel] [xen-unstable test] 6599: tolerable FAIL, xen . org |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |
