Simon,
About the xenstore implementation - i have no clew about it, so i
guess i'm using the default implementation.
So, you will post a fix patch for it?
Thanks,
Tom
On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 11:38 AM, Simon Horman<horms@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 11:03:19AM +0300, Tom Rotenberg wrote:
>> Simon,
>>
>> Thanks for investing the time to solve the bugs i'm reporting.
>>
>> I must say, that the second problem i reported (the complete machine
>> freeze), is much important in my opinion, so i also hope, that someone
>> from the community, will give it a look, it's certainly blocking me,
>> and i don't know from where to start on this issue. Anyway, i'm
>> waiting for your inputs about the second problem.
>
> I suspect you are correct. I'll try and spend some time on it very soon.
>
>> On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 4:58 AM, Simon Horman<horms@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > On Sun, Jul 26, 2009 at 01:01:02PM +0300, Tom Rotenberg wrote:
>> >> Simon,
>> >>
>> >> (BTW - Did you see my other mail, about a problem, which causes the
>> >> machine to freeze? i suspect that this might be due to the multi-fn
>> >> pass-through code. Can u please give your opinion about it?)
>> >
>> > Its quite likely that the problem that you are seeing is caused by
>> > multi-function. Especially as a) you are probably the only person to
>> > exercise the code in this way so far and b) the PCI pass-through code is
>> > in my opinion very fragile.
>> >
>> > I haven't looked closely into the problem yet - I was kind of hoping
>> > someone else would while I was tracking down the cause of the
>> > other problems that you have reported.
>> >
>> >> Here is the resulting log:
>> >
>> > [snip]
>> >
>> >> [2009-07-26 05:59:12 4286] INFO (XendDomainInfo:2146) Created PCI device
>> >> 0000:00:1a.0 at index 0 with state None
>> >> [2009-07-26 05:59:12 4286] INFO (XendDomainInfo:2146) Created PCI device
>> >> 0000:00:1d.0 at index 1 with state None
>> >
>> > Thanks, that is very interesting. It looks like 0000:00:1a.0 is
>> > being inserted into xenstore twice, which is invalid. I'll hunt
>> > further to see if I can work out why that is occurring.
>
> On closer examination 0000:00:1a.0 != 0000:00:1d.0, so my comment
> immediately above is wrong.
>
> What I now think is happening is that for some reason on your system
> when _createDevices() initialises the devices in xenstore using
> _createDevice() then end up with no state entry. Whereas on my system
> then end up with state 3=Initialised.
>
> It seems to me that actually the behaviour of your system
> is correct and my system is bogus. I really don't know why
> that is the case - are you using the stock xenstore implementation
> in C, or the Ocaml version?
>
> In any case, it seems to be that your original work-around was more or less
> correct. I'll just tweak it a bit to handle the case where cleanupDevices()
> is shuffling entries because one or more have been deleted and repost it.
>
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
Home