Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH/RFC] vl: add no-panic option

2016-10-17 Thread Christian Borntraeger
On 10/17/2016 07:17 PM, Markus Armbruster wrote: > Christian Borntraeger writes: > >> Some testcase will trigger a guest panic state. For testing purposes >> it can be useful to exit QEMU anyway. >> >> Signed-off-by: Christian Borntraeger >> ---

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH/RFC] vl: add no-panic option

2016-10-17 Thread Markus Armbruster
Christian Borntraeger writes: > Some testcase will trigger a guest panic state. For testing purposes > it can be useful to exit QEMU anyway. > > Signed-off-by: Christian Borntraeger > --- > qemu-options.hx | 9 + > vl.c| 6

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH/RFC] vl: add no-panic option

2016-10-17 Thread Paolo Bonzini
On 17/10/2016 14:54, Christian Borntraeger wrote: > On 10/17/2016 02:50 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >>> Some testcase will trigger a guest panic state. For testing purposes >>> it can be useful to exit QEMU anyway. >> >> I wonder if this should be done by default *unless* -no-shutdown is >>

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH/RFC] vl: add no-panic option

2016-10-17 Thread no-reply
Hi, Your series seems to have some coding style problems. See output below for more information: Subject: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH/RFC] vl: add no-panic option Type: series Message-id: 1476706440-112198-1-git-send-email-borntrae...@de.ibm.com === TEST SCRIPT BEGIN === #!/bin/bash BASE=base n=1

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH/RFC] vl: add no-panic option

2016-10-17 Thread Christian Borntraeger
On 10/17/2016 02:50 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> Some testcase will trigger a guest panic state. For testing purposes >> it can be useful to exit QEMU anyway. > > I wonder if this should be done by default *unless* -no-shutdown is > provided. This would require some planning (and delay this to

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH/RFC] vl: add no-panic option

2016-10-17 Thread Paolo Bonzini
> Some testcase will trigger a guest panic state. For testing purposes > it can be useful to exit QEMU anyway. I wonder if this should be done by default *unless* -no-shutdown is provided. This would require some planning (and delay this to 2.9, in all likelihood), but it probably would be