From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>,
Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>,
michael.roth@amd.com,
Daniel Henrique Barboza <danielhb413@gmail.com>,
Julia Suvorova <jusual@redhat.com>,
"qemu-devel@nongnu.org" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>,
"qemu-ppc@nongnu.org" <qemu-ppc@nongnu.org>,
Laine Stump <laine@redhat.com>,
Igor Mammedov <imammedo@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] adding a generic QAPI event for failed device hotunplug
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2021 13:06:53 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <fc4b9be9-8fca-cfba-5c26-f3ad8ae8035c@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YFg7qYYBqGZuKSO+@yekko.fritz.box>
On 22/03/21 07:39, David Gibson wrote:
>> QEMU doesn't really keep track of "in flight" unplug requests, and as
>> long as that's the case, its timeout even will have the same issue.
> Not generically, maybe. In the PAPR code we effectively do, by means
> of the 'unplug_requested' boolean in the DRC structure. Maybe that's
> a mistake, but at the time I couldn't see how else to handle things.
No, that's good. x86 also tracks it in some registers that are
accessible from the ACPI firmware. See "PCI slot removal notification"
in docs/specs/acpi_pci_hotplug.txt.
> Currently we will resolve all "in flight" requests at machine reset
> time, effectively completing those requests. Does that differ from
> x86 behaviour?
IIRC on x86 the requests are instead cancelled, but I'm not 100% sure.
Paolo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-22 12:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-03-05 18:16 [RFC] adding a generic QAPI event for failed device hotunplug Daniel Henrique Barboza
2021-03-06 6:57 ` Markus Armbruster
2021-03-08 14:22 ` Daniel Henrique Barboza
2021-03-08 17:04 ` Markus Armbruster
2021-03-08 18:01 ` Daniel Henrique Barboza
2021-03-09 3:22 ` David Gibson
2021-03-09 6:22 ` Markus Armbruster
2021-03-11 20:50 ` Daniel Henrique Barboza
2021-03-12 1:19 ` David Gibson
2021-03-12 8:12 ` Markus Armbruster
2021-03-19 7:55 ` Markus Armbruster
2021-03-22 6:39 ` David Gibson
2021-03-22 12:06 ` Paolo Bonzini [this message]
2021-03-23 3:33 ` David Gibson
2021-03-23 13:06 ` Igor Mammedov
2021-03-29 5:35 ` David Gibson
2021-03-29 9:38 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-03-12 13:38 ` Laine Stump
2021-03-22 6:43 ` David Gibson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=fc4b9be9-8fca-cfba-5c26-f3ad8ae8035c@redhat.com \
--to=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=armbru@redhat.com \
--cc=danielhb413@gmail.com \
--cc=david@gibson.dropbear.id.au \
--cc=imammedo@redhat.com \
--cc=jusual@redhat.com \
--cc=laine@redhat.com \
--cc=michael.roth@amd.com \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=qemu-ppc@nongnu.org \
--cc=quintela@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).