Re: [Xen-devel] Re: pvops kernel branches - 2.6.36 options, stable/next/etc?

[Bruce Edge <bruce.edge@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 11:43 AM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> It's not a patch on konrad's stable/xen-pcifront-0.8.2 branch which was
> looking very good around the 10/21 timeframe, but which has also developed
> it's own set of instabilities recently.

Oooh, share please.

> I haven't reported any of the symptoms as I thought I'd let the dist settle
> before starting the bug reporting.
>
> Is there some other branch that developers working on PCI device drivers in
> a pvops domU should be following?

Well, I am working on a PCI E820 hole thingie,

If this for the 4GB mem limit on pvops domUs?

 

but those patches are in the
infancy period. There are some fixes:

stable/xen-pcifront-fixes

but they aren't that .. sophisticated.

>
> I realize that we're tracking unstable trees, but it's either that or hvm.
> We'd like to stick with the benefits that pvops provides, but I'm running
> out of branches to try.
>
> The last stable domU I built was:
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/konrad/xen.git -
> stable/xen-pcifront-0.8.2
>  8029255fcc3a7925ad8ee9f5fdc0764b6662301e

Hmm, so the difference between that and the upstream is the PVonHVM and
the initial domain 0 support (all in Stefano's tree).

I tried disabling the  CONFIG_XEN_PVHVM with no change. (see the "2.6.37-rc1 mainline domU - BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request" thread.
Is that sufficient to eliminate the PnonHVM from the equation?

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