Re: [Xen-devel] ACPI shutdown unreliable with win7?

[Paul Durrant <Paul.Durrant@xxxxxxxxxx>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Durrant
> Sent: 29 May 2015 16:07
> To: Ian Campbell
> Cc: Jan Beulich; Andrew Cooper; Ian Jackson; xen-devel
> Subject: RE: [Xen-devel] ACPI shutdown unreliable with win7?
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ian Campbell [mailto:ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx]
> > Sent: 29 May 2015 15:36
> > To: Paul Durrant
> > Cc: Jan Beulich; Andrew Cooper; Ian Jackson; xen-devel
> > Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] ACPI shutdown unreliable with win7?
> >
> > On Fri, 2015-05-29 at 15:25 +0100, Paul Durrant wrote:
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Ian Campbell [mailto:ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx]
> > > > Sent: 29 May 2015 14:14
> > > > To: Jan Beulich
> > > > Cc: Andrew Cooper; Paul Durrant; Ian Jackson; xen-devel
> > > > Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] ACPI shutdown unreliable with win7?
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, 2015-05-29 at 14:04 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > > > >>> On 29.05.15 at 14:54, <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > > On Fri, 2015-05-22 at 10:08 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > > > > >> If win7 doesn't shutdown given a power button request I'd be
> more
> > > > > >> inclined to remove the setting in osstest for those flights and let
> > > > > >> guest-stop go back to being never pass than to start making such
> > > > changes
> > > > > >> to the VM config which I think would probably break the preceding
> > > > > >> suspend and migration tests (which aren't completely reliable, but
> > are
> > > > > >> far more so than this shutdown one).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Does anyone have any ideas here or shall I propose:
> > > > >
> > > > > Unless we have a way to make an adjustment inside the guest for the
> > > > > power button to gain "shutdown" meaning, I think there's no
> > alternative
> > > > > to the change below.
> > > >
> > > > The strange this is that it does work _sometimes_, either by complete
> > > > coincidence or because there is something non-deterministic about
> how
> > > > Win7 reacts to this ACPI event.
> > > >
> > >
> > > How long is the test waiting for the OS to shut down though? If you
> > > get unlucky, Windows will wander off to Windows Update, download a
> > > bazillion patches and take more than an hour to shut down. If youâre
> > > lucky, it may shut down in 10 seconds or less.
> >
> > The screenshot in e.g.
> > http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/56929/test-amd64-
> amd64-
> > xl-qemut-win7-amd64/info.html
> > seems to show that the guest isn't even trying to shut down, it's just
> > sat there at the desktop:
> >
> > http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/56929/test-amd64-
> amd64-
> > xl-qemut-win7-amd64/win.guest.osstest--vnc.jpeg
> >
> > I think if it had hit WU there would be activity on the screen?
> >
> > FWIW We appear to wait 200s, if we were seeing failures due to windows
> > update then I'd be inclined to extend that, but I think right now that
> > would be premature, unless WU happens with no status on the screen.
> >
> 
> No, you'd see something. Perhaps our ACPI lid/power switch code is just
> buggy then?
> 

I already said this to Ian, but for the record... From my reading of the ACPI 
spec (v 5.0, page 23 glossary entry) the SCI is an active low, shareable, 
level-sensitive interrupt, but our code (pmtimer.c:pmt_update_sci) seems to 
treat it as active high. I'll have a look at the QEMU SCI code as reference, 
but maybe it is just broken.

  Paul

>   Paul
> 
> > Ian

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel