[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <53D651EF.8080807@citrix.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2014 14:36:47 +0100
From: David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com>
To: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
<xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org>
CC: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@...citrix.com>,
Andrew Jones <drjones@...hat.com>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 2/4] xen/pvhvm: Introduce xen_pvhvm_kexec_shutdown()
On 15/07/14 14:40, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> PVHVM guest requires special actions before kexec. Register specific
> xen_pvhvm_kexec_shutdown() handler for machine_ops.shutdown().
[...]
> --- a/arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c
> @@ -1833,6 +1833,12 @@ static struct notifier_block xen_hvm_cpu_notifier = {
> .notifier_call = xen_hvm_cpu_notify,
> };
>
> +static void xen_pvhvm_kexec_shutdown(void)
> +{
> + xen_kexec_shutdown();
I think it would be preferrable to have
if (kexec_in_progress)
xen_kexec_shutdown();
David
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists