|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
xen-devel
Re: [Xen-devel] xm pause causing lockup
I haven't tracked down the problem yet, but I thought the following
was sufficiently interesting to post:
kmacy@curly while (1)
while? xm list
while? sleep 5
while? end
Name Id Mem(MB) CPU State Time(s) Console
Domain-0 0 507 0 r---- 67.9
xen-vm2 1 128 1 r---- 4.0 9601
Name Id Mem(MB) CPU State Time(s) Console
Domain-0 0 507 0 r---- 68.1
xen-vm2 1 128 1 r---- 4.0 9601
Name Id Mem(MB) CPU State Time(s) Console
Domain-0 0 507 0 r---- 68.3
xen-vm2 1 128 1 r---- 4.0 9601
Name Id Mem(MB) CPU State Time(s) Console
Domain-0 0 507 0 r---- 68.5
xen-vm2 1 128 1 r---- 4.0 9601
Name Id Mem(MB) CPU State Time(s) Console
Domain-0 0 507 0 r---- 68.7
xen-vm2 1 128 1 r---- 4.0 9601
Name Id Mem(MB) CPU State Time(s) Console
Domain-0 0 507 0 r---- 68.9
xen-vm2 1 128 1 r---- 4.0 9601
xen-vm2 is always shown as running, but its time is not increasing.
-Kip
On 4/13/05, Kip Macy <kip.macy@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 4/13/05, Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Probably easiest way to trace this is with printk's in Xen. The guts of
> > the work is done by domain_pause_by_systemcontroller() in xen/sched.h.
> > This in turn calls domain_sleep() in common/schedule.c.
>
> I traced through that code a while back when trying to decide what to
> call from the int3 handler.
>
> A particularly
> > interesting place to look will be teh synchronous spin loop at the end
> > of domain_sleep -- if the paused domain isn't descheduled for some
> > weird reason then the spin loop would never exit and domain0 would
> > hang.
>
> Good point. It will be interesting to see.
>
> I sometimes wonder if I should keep some of the buggy versions of
> FreeBSD around for regression testing as they trigger some interesting
> behaviours in xen and xend.
>
> -Kip
>
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
|
|
|
|