Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932430AbWCPFMW (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Mar 2006 00:12:22 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932442AbWCPFMV (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Mar 2006 00:12:21 -0500 Received: from ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com ([166.70.28.69]:63195 "EHLO ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932430AbWCPFMU (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Mar 2006 00:12:20 -0500 To: Zachary Amsden Cc: Linus Torvalds , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Virtualization Mailing List , Xen-devel , Andrew Morton , Dan Hecht , Dan Arai , Anne Holler , Pratap Subrahmanyam , Christopher Li , Joshua LeVasseur , Chris Wright , Rik Van Riel , Jyothy Reddy , Jack Lo , Kip Macy , Jan Beulich , Ky Srinivasan , Wim Coekaerts , Leendert van Doorn Subject: Re: [RFC, PATCH 14/24] i386 Vmi reboot fixes References: <200603131809.k2DI9slZ005727@zach-dev.vmware.com> <4418A21E.6030704@vmware.com> From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 22:03:44 -0700 In-Reply-To: <4418A21E.6030704@vmware.com> (Zachary Amsden's message of "Wed, 15 Mar 2006 15:24:14 -0800") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.1007 (Gnus v5.10.7) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1698 Lines: 44 Zachary Amsden writes: > Eric W. Biederman wrote: >> Zachary Amsden writes: >> Huh? Rebooting through the BIOS and kexec are pretty much mutually exclusive. >> Looking at the patch I can't see what you are talking about either. >> > > Let me rephrase - kexec doesn't define calls for machine_shutdown and others > that are in arch/i386/kernel/reboot.c. So kexec requires BIOS reboot code to be > compiled in, even though the usage of the two is mutually exclusive. Partially true. Basically it has never been optional to compile in the BIOS reboot code and kexec did not change that situation. Although it did provide a similar mechanism. >> Does kexec successfully work under VMWare? >> > > It should work just fine. But it could expose bugs on either end. I've been > monitoring our kexec testing, and I'll be able to help you with any issues that > we might find on the Linux side. :) Ok. >> machine_halt does not want to stop the processor. It is very much >> about killing the kernel and user space but having the software still >> linger a little. >> > > I was afraid of that. I can back that change out. The problem I had was that > the shutdown code I was running in userspace would not make the syscalls to > actually call machine_power_off, but machine_halt instead. Will fix. /sbin/halt -p will call machine_power_off if pm_power_off is defined. otherwise it will call machine_halt. Eric - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/