On 08.04.2021 11:12, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 08:20:15AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: >> On 07.04.2021 18:27, Roger Pau Monné wrote: >>> On Wed, Apr 07, 2021 at 04:55:43PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 31.03.2021 12:32, Roger Pau Monne wrote: >>>>> Add a new vlapic_set_irq_callback helper in order to inject a vector >>>>> and set a callback to be executed when the guest performs the end of >>>>> interrupt acknowledgment. >>>>> >>>>> Such functionality will be used to migrate the current ad hoc handling >>>>> done in vlapic_handle_EOI for the vectors that require some logic to >>>>> be executed when the end of interrupt is performed. >>>>> >>>>> The setter of the callback will be in charge for setting the callback >>>>> again on resume. That is the reason why vlapic_set_callback is not a >>>>> static function. >>>> >>>> I'm struggling with your use of "resume" here: Resuming from S3 >>>> doesn't require re-doing anything that's kept in memory, does it? >>>> So what meaning does the word have here? >>> >>> Right, I can see the confusion. Resume here means a guest being >>> migrated or restored, not Xen itself being resumed. Callbacks are not >>> part of the exported guest state, and hence any emulated device that >>> requires a callback will have to register it as part of loading the >>> saved state. >>> >>>> Apart from this, and with the xzalloc_array() change requested >>>> by Andrew, this looks good to me. >> >> In which case with this change and "resume" replaced suitably in the >> description > > I've worded it as: > > "The setter of the callback will be in charge for setting the callback > again on guest restore or resume, as callbacks are not saved as part > of the vlapic state. That is the reason why vlapic_set_callback is not > a static function."
Hmm, you still mention "resume", which makes me continue to wonder what you're thinking of beyond guest restore. Jan
