Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2] libxl: allow libxl_domain_suspend to simply suspend a domain, without saving it

[Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Wei Liu writes ("Re: [PATCH v2] libxl: allow libxl_domain_suspend to simply 
suspend a domain, without saving it"):
> On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 03:36:08PM +0100, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote:
> > When LIBXL_SUSPEND_NO_SAVE flag is set, no savefile will be written, but
> > the domain will still be suspended (but not destroyed). The main reason
> > for this functionality is to suspend the host while some domains are
> > running, potentially holding PCI devices. This will give a chance to a
> > driver in such a domain to properly suspend the device.
> > 
...
> > Signed-off-by: Marek Marczykowski-Górecki <marmarek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Marcus of Wetware Labs <marcus@xxxxxxxx>
> 
> The code and idea look fine.
> 
> I would like to give Ian a chance to voice his opinion (he's currently
> away).

The API does seem a bit odd.  The intent is then that the domain will
be un-suspended afterwards ?  This doesn't seem to be documented
AFAICT in your patch.

I don't think I agree with this part of the reaoning:

> > It would be better to have a separate function for this, but in fact it
> > should be named libxl_domain_suspend, then the current one renamed to
> > libxl_domain_save. Since that would break API compatibility, keep it in
> > the same function.

I agree that libxl_domain_suspend is an unfortunate name, but can't we
come up with an alternative new name ?  It does seem odd to bundle
this into _save.

Ian.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel