| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-devel
Re: [Xen-devel] Windows Bug Check 0x101 issue
|
To: |
Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Subject: |
Re: [Xen-devel] Windows Bug Check 0x101 issue |
|
From: |
Alan Cox <alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Date: |
Thu, 27 Mar 2008 16:30:46 +0000 |
|
Cc: |
xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Kouya Shimura <kouya@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Delivery-date: |
Thu, 27 Mar 2008 09:48:00 -0700 |
|
Envelope-to: |
www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|
In-reply-to: |
<18411.52353.526441.433440@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
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> |
|
Organization: |
Red Hat UK Cyf., Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SL4 1TE, Y Deyrnas Gyfunol. Cofrestrwyd yng Nghymru a Lloegr o'r rhif cofrestru 3798903 |
|
References: |
<7k4pawfnxs.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <C40D3B88.15566%keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <7k1w5zf50j.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <18408.57824.846687.465435@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20080325175718.GT4411@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <7ky786dkup.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <18410.9596.488204.878357@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <7ktziseo9r.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20080327090831.2a9f9b05@core> <18411.52353.526441.433440@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Sender: |
xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
> having decided to violate it, perhaps the right answer is to make the
> disk simply vanish: ignore all future command writes, zero all of the
> registers that the host is attempting to read, not issue an interrupt,
> and somehow discard the responses from any overlapped IO which is in
> flight.
I think it is safest - and if the underlying storage fails something bad
has happened and anything else we do would make it worse
>
> Is that what you meant by `offline the virtual device' ?
Just leave the busy bit set forever, the host will get fed up of waiting,
reset, rinse repeat a few times and (except for older Linux) then offline
the device. Older Linux (ie drivers/ide) has problems coping with failed
drives so will carry on spewing but limp along ok.
Alan
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
|
|
| |
|
Home