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: AW: [Xen-devel] VHD BUG in xen4.0 when install windows2008

To: Daniel Stodden <daniel.stodden@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: AW: [Xen-devel] VHD BUG in xen4.0 when install windows2008
From: yingbin wang <yingbin.wangyb@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2010 13:04:41 +0800
Cc: Heiko Wundram <modelnine@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 22:05:32 -0700
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=nJNFTiB+qGJ1ilcj1FUtpSe3SaHn0DLVOad7ZI6x4gY=; b=axiDijSRuwKm9RetJTmsXjg4zmxzP4vxf0iOdSCA8v1zcqhzbZjH28D6BpWf/tUVKd VbScg3dS5THNu8EmidsNm6hJYpAEaHk7HS0oKVpW8N9F9noWvO78kqOSsssV1X71f4FZ qQPOszu+6gilf3rO6HUXw5oPAGgX/+OJTL5Ic=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=cQgq9OBBfzUtoyFR+YpaftWBcyTMkLUMq/XoxF37o+mlnX42RzEjOp73fogW8R5uun 8lgO00zuuPkXTSma6WkOgzgm/9YOSSQdlvQLRqIwVltgvijzfQvyR7rCrLzJil/Ghjkd yNtwc350s7YT17AM7bWR5DBIXmS5aZdZpNF6I=
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <1273477736.14481.22.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
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: <o2xacd07b8d1005072213v9c783chf68e7571d8fd411@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4FA716B1526C7C4DB0375C6DADBC4EA37ACEAA5FE3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <q2zacd07b8d1005080546x95dfa41eq88b26374c96e5051@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <l2macd07b8d1005081002ocec5fdf9wbd9498456a0298ce@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20100508195226.GB17817@xxxxxxxxxxx> <1273430440.2658.39.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <001e01caefaa$51fd6440$f5f82cc0$@org> <1273477736.14481.22.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
hi,
had you created the patch to make tapdisk run the device queue synchronously?
if yes, could you tell me how to get it?

thanks
wyb

2010/5/10 Daniel Stodden <daniel.stodden@xxxxxxxxxx>:
> On Sun, 2010-05-09 at 15:03 -0400, Heiko Wundram wrote:
>> As I'm seeing a similar behavior of tapdisk2 (see my recent posts to 
>> xen-users, especially "blktap2, also broken in current pv_ops 
>> stable-2.6.32.x?"), I can confirm that at least in my testing (I've done 
>> some more over the weekend, re. that message), this is indeed an 
>> "SMP-related" problem, but only for HVM-64bit domains.
>>
>> What I can basically say is that:
>>
>> 1) Uni/Multi/32-bit/64-bit PV domains run properly.
>> 1) Uni-VCPU, 32-bit HVM domains run properly.
>> 2) Multi-VCPU, 32-bit HVM domains run properly.
>> 3) Uni-VCPU, 64-bit HVM domains run properly.
>> 4) Multi-VCPU, 64-bit HVM domains cause tapdisk2 to segfault, sometimes, 
>> under heavy I/O, and if that happens, causes the Dom0-kernel to freeze/lock 
>> up, Bug, and/or all other kinds of undefined behavior, where I really 
>> haven't made out a pattern yet.
>>
>> Interestingly, these errors do not happen when using the "normal" 
>> blkback-driver, and I'm very positive (at least that's what happened during 
>> my testing) that it's specific to Multi-VCPU, 64-bit HVM domains that the 
>> crash occurs, independent of the number of VCPUs bound to Dom0.
>
> Okay, one thing which was going to happen soon is a patch to make
> tapdisk run the device queue synchronously. From your description I'm
> just not very convinced that this resolves such issues as well. Looks
> like it needs some 64 bit testing beforehand.
>
> Thanks for the hints. Does HVM up there mean it's rather triggered by
> qemu alone? Were you running pv drivers?
>
> Cheers,
> Daniel
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
>

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