On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 09:51:29PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> 2011/3/30 Gleb Natapov <g...@redhat.com>:
> > On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 07:53:41PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> >> I'm not convinced about the utility of printing the pid, personally.
> >> Most programs get along fine without printing anything when
> >> they receive a terminal signal.
>
> > Well qemu is a bit of special case. It is long running process that
> > takes huge amount of memory and, as suchm it becomes a target of various
> > monitoring script which, when configured incorrectly, start killing
> > perfectly valid guests. In addition killing of the guest looks exactly
> > like guest shutdown to management software because we call shutdow_request
> > in the signal handler.
>
> That sounds like a flaw in the communication protocol between
> qemu and the management software, which would be better fixed
> by having qemu communicate the reason for exit directly (ie
> not just by printing to stderr), surely?
>
Yes, but this is more complex and changes QMP protocol.
> > Exactly. This should do the trick (not tested).
>
> Looks good, and a test shows I don't get the segfault any more.
>
> Reviewed-by: Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org>
>
> although I guess you'll want to submit it with a sensible git
> commit message :-)
>
Will do.
--
Gleb.
