RE: [Xen-devel] poweroff in 3.2 and 3.3

["Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx>]

>From: Jan Beulich [mailto:jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx] 
>Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2008 4:18 PM
>>However I'm considering the point whether Xen can simply reject the
>>s3 request, when observing non-current vcpus still alive. Domain can
>>be in trouble if unaware of underlying sleep phase, such time keeping
>>and softlockup warning. More seriously, domain with passthrough
>>devices can't recover device state since it's even not 
>notified to save
>>context. Opinions?
>
>I agree to this. But as per above, S3 (and S4 if ever 
>supported) must be
>distinguished from S5 in this regard.
>

Why is distinguish required here? You just want a machine poweroff with
S5, and it doesn't matter to reuse same main path as S3.

Thanks,
Kevin
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel