| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-devel
Re: [Xen-devel] Network dies and kernel errors
On Tuesday, August 02, 2011 11:17:36 am Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 06:21:47PM -0500, John McMonagle wrote:
> > Konrad
> >
> > I ran as you requested and after 2 days it's still up.
>
> Good!
>
> > Attached are xen.dmesg and dom0.dmesg all the command line parameters
> > are in them.
> >
> > At this point I'd be happy if was on line with a reasonably efficient
> > stable configuration.
>
> So it looks like from your runs (before you had irqbalance):
>
> (XEN) MSI 31 vec=ad fixed edge assert phys cpu dest=00000023
> mask=1/0/0 (XEN) MSI 31 vec=ad fixed edge assert phys cpu
> dest=00000023 mask=1/0/0 (XEN) MSI 31 vec=ad fixed edge assert
> phys cpu dest=00000023 mask=1/0/0 (XEN) MSI 31 vec=ad fixed edge
> assert phys cpu dest=00000023 mask=1/0/0 (XEN) IRQ: 31
> affinity:00000000,00000000,00000000,00004000 vec:b5 type=PCI-MSI
> status=00000010 in-flight=0 domain-list=0:273(----), (XEN) MSI 31
> vec=39 fixed edge assert phys cpu dest=00000020 mask=1/0/0 (XEN)
> IRQ: 31 affinity:00000000,00000000,00000000,00000100 vec:39 type=PCI-MSI
> status=00000050 in-flight=0 domain-list=0:273(----),
>
> The affinity (and the corresponding vector) moves from one CPU to another
> and then dom0 somehow does not get it. Do you have another of these
> boxes available remotly to debug this further?
Konrad
Just one box but I'm willing to try more things.
A shame this is otherwise a really nice box for the price.
I sent Supermicro another email with updated info.
I'm not holding my breath :-(
They did fix the ipmi firmware for me so I guess I can hope for a fix.
In my last test shouldn't dom0_vcpus=2 have been dom0_max_vcpus=2?
Dom0 still has 16 cpus.
I'd prefer not pining dom0 but stability is more important :-)
Thanks for all the help so far.
John
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
|
|
| |
|
Home