On 29.09.2016 21:44, John Ferlan wrote:
>
>
> On 09/29/2016 11:04 AM, Peter Krempa wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 10:30:07 -0400, John Ferlan wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 09/20/2016 04:10 AM, Viktor Mihajlovski wrote:
[...]
>>>
>>> So, I have a question based on a little bit of testing I did with one
On 09/29/2016 11:04 AM, Peter Krempa wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 10:30:07 -0400, John Ferlan wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 09/20/2016 04:10 AM, Viktor Mihajlovski wrote:
>>> Currently, the virVcpuInfo returned by virDomainGetVcpus() will always
>>> report a state of VIR_VCPU_RUNNING for each defined do
On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 10:30:07 -0400, John Ferlan wrote:
>
>
> On 09/20/2016 04:10 AM, Viktor Mihajlovski wrote:
> > Currently, the virVcpuInfo returned by virDomainGetVcpus() will always
> > report a state of VIR_VCPU_RUNNING for each defined domain vcpu even if
> > the vcpu is currently in th
On 09/20/2016 04:10 AM, Viktor Mihajlovski wrote:
> Currently, the virVcpuInfo returned by virDomainGetVcpus() will always
> report a state of VIR_VCPU_RUNNING for each defined domain vcpu even if
> the vcpu is currently in the halted state.
>
> As the monitor interface is in fact reporting the
Currently, the virVcpuInfo returned by virDomainGetVcpus() will always
report a state of VIR_VCPU_RUNNING for each defined domain vcpu even if
the vcpu is currently in the halted state.
As the monitor interface is in fact reporting the accurate state, it is
rather easy to transport this informatio
