Re: [PATCH 1/4] qapi/qdev.json: add DEVICE_NOT_DELETED event

[Daniel Henrique Barboza <danielhb413@gmail.com>]

On 3/23/21 3:00 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 3/12/21 2:07 PM, Daniel Henrique Barboza wrote:
>> This new event informs QAPI listeners that a previously issued
>> 'device_del' command failed to delete the device from the machine.
>>
>> Note that no assertion can be made about the failure reason. The goal of
>> this event is to inform management that QEMU is not able to assess
>> whether the hotunplug is taking too long to complete or failed in the
>> guest and, as result, the device is not removed from QOM. When receiving
>> this event, users/management must check inside the guest to verify the
>> result of the hotunplug operation.
>>
>> This scenario happens with architectures where the guest does not have
>> an official way to report the hotunplug error back to the hypervisor,
>> such as PowerPC and the pseries machine type.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Daniel Henrique Barboza <danielhb413@gmail.com>
>> ---
>>   qapi/qdev.json | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   1 file changed, 28 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/qapi/qdev.json b/qapi/qdev.json
>> index b83178220b..df9a1b9e67 100644
>> --- a/qapi/qdev.json
>> +++ b/qapi/qdev.json
>> @@ -124,3 +124,31 @@
>>   ##
>>   { 'event': 'DEVICE_DELETED',
>>     'data': { '*device': 'str', 'path': 'str' } }
>> +
>> +##
>> +# @DEVICE_NOT_DELETED:
>> +#
>> +# Emitted whenever the device removal process expired and the device
>> +# still exists in QOM. This indicates that the guest took too long
>> +# to acknowlege the device removal, and we can not be sure of whether
> 
> acknowledge
> 
>> +# the process will be completed in the guest later on or a guest
>> +# side error occurred.
>> +#
>> +# It is not safe to reuse the specified device ID.
>> +#
>> +# @device: device name
>> +#
>> +# @path: device path
>> +#
>> +# Since: 6.0
> 
> This is a new event, and we've missed feature freeze; is this fixing a
> bug that was not present in 5.2 (in which case it is fine for -rc1), or
> is this a long-standing problem where one more release without the
> mechanism won't make life any worse?

I believe these events I'm trying to add can be postponed to the next release.



> 
>> +#
>> +# Example:
>> +#
>> +# <- { "event": "DEVICE_NOT_DELETED",
>> +#      "data": { "device": "core1",
>> +#                "path": "/machine/peripheral/core1" },
>> +#      "timestamp": { "seconds": 1615570254, "microseconds": 573986 } }
>> +#
>> +##
>> +{ 'event': 'DEVICE_NOT_DELETED',
>> +  'data': { '*device': 'str', 'path': 'str' } }
>> \ No newline at end of file
> 
> You'll want to fix that.


Yep, in both patches (1 and 3).


Thanks,


DHB


>