On Fri, 2018-11-16 at 21:58 +0000, Julien Grall wrote:
> On 16/11/2018 21:41, Mirela Simonovic wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 8:09 PM Stefano Stabellini
> > <sstabellini@kernel.org> wrote:
> > > > It should be possible to figure out which domain needs to
> > > > awaken from
> > > > there.
> > > 
> > > Actually, evtchn_send eventually will trigger a proper interrupt
> > > injection into the domain
> > > (xen/arch/arm/vgic.c:arch_evtchn_inject),
> > > which will necessarely wake it up. So it is possible that it will
> > > already work without any need for additional changes?
> > > 
> > 
> > Absolutely, that sounds great :) Then we could just drop this
> > patch.
> 
> I don't think you can drop this patch... As you tie the host suspend
> to 
> the hardware domain suspend, it may makes sense to resume at the same
> time.
> 
FWIW, I think that too.

In fact, let's assume a *fully* disaggregated setup, where dom0 only
has the toolstack, while it has no hardware, no PV backend, etc... If
we don't resume it explicitly together with Xen, who is going to resume
it? :-O

Regards,
Dario
-- 
<<This happens because I choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Dario Faggioli, Ph.D, http://about.me/dario.faggioli
Software Engineer @ SUSE https://www.suse.com/