WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] soft lockups during live migrate..

To: Mukesh Rathor <mukesh.rathor@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] soft lockups during live migrate..
From: Tim Deegan <Tim.Deegan@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 09:25:25 +0000
Cc: "Xen-Devel \(E-mail\)" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 02:25:47 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20091023151651.2bfc4b49@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <20091022212149.32d73745@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20091023100936.GJ20579@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20091023151651.2bfc4b49@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
At 23:16 +0100 on 23 Oct (1256339811), Mukesh Rathor wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 11:09:36 +0100
> Tim Deegan <Tim.Deegan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > At 05:21 +0100 on 23 Oct (1256275309), Mukesh Rathor wrote:
> > > Trying to migrate a 64bit PV guest with 64GB running medium to
> > > heavy load on xen 3.4.0, it is showing lot of soft lockups. The
> > > softlockups are causing dom0 reboot by the cluster FS. The hardware
> > > has 256GB and 32 CPUs.
> > > 
> > > Looking into the hypervisor thru kdb, I see one cpu in
> > > sh_resync_all() while all other 31 appear spinning on the
> > > shadow_lock.
> > 
> > How many vcpus does the guest have?  Scalability issues in the OOS
> > shadow code are more related to number of VCPUs than amount of RAM.
> 
> Actually, things are fine with 32GB/32vcpus. Problem happens with
> 64GB/32vcpus. Trying the unstable version now.

Interesting.  Have you tried increading the amount of shadow memeory 
you give to the guest?  IIRC xend tries to pick a sensible default but
if it's too low and you start thrashing things can get very slow indeed.

Tim.

-- 
Tim Deegan <Tim.Deegan@xxxxxxxxxx>
Principal Software Engineer, Citrix Systems (R&D) Ltd.
[Company #02300071, SL9 0DZ, UK.]

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel