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

[Xen-devel] Re: Xend transaction reduction breaks migration

To: Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Xen-devel] Re: Xend transaction reduction breaks migration
From: "Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 18:39:20 +0000
Cc: xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 10:40:12 -0800
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <C36138EA.187A2%Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
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/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <C36138EA.187A2%Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: "Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 11:44:42PM +0000, Keir Fraser wrote:
> Hey Daniel,
> 
> It turns out that your changeset 16260 in xen-unstable breaks our localhost
> non-live migration tests. What happens is that randomly (but fairly often)
> xend will throw an assertion at line 'assert console_port' in
> XendCheckpoint.py. This is in the domain_restore_fd context, so result is
> that the restorer dies and then of course the saver fails soon after since
> the migration socket goes away.
> 
> Any idea how your patch could cause this rather bizarre behaviour? I haven't
> worked it out myself, though I'm 99% sure it *is* that changeset that has
> caused this regression (based on tests with the changeset reverted).

Basically, instead of doing many small transactions, my change made some stuff
all happen in one large transaction. Oddly though, I tried to be careful so
that I only changed the codepath for the 'xm list' operation (well the SEXPR
call to the list operation). Other operations like create, save, restore
ought to be left using fine grained transactions as before.

Dan.
-- 
|=- Red Hat, Engineering, Emerging Technologies, Boston.  +1 978 392 2496 -=|
|=-           Perl modules: http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/              -=|
|=-               Projects: http://freshmeat.net/~danielpb/               -=|
|=-  GnuPG: 7D3B9505   F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505  -=| 

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