| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-devel
Re: [Xen-devel] Re: VM hung after running sometime
|
To: |
MaoXiaoyun <tinnycloud@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Subject: |
Re: [Xen-devel] Re: VM hung after running sometime |
|
From: |
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx> |
|
Date: |
Wed, 29 Sep 2010 09:12:07 -0700 |
|
Cc: |
xen devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|
Delivery-date: |
Wed, 29 Sep 2010 09:12:57 -0700 |
|
Envelope-to: |
www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|
In-reply-to: |
<BAY121-W512F127F0819CA2E5DC3D2DA670@xxxxxxx> |
|
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/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe> |
|
List-unsubscribe: |
<http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe> |
|
References: |
<C8BE230D.239BA%keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, , <4C98EB42.4020808@xxxxxxxx>, <BAY121-W10DFCBC2F3B78D89381527DA600@xxxxxxx>, , <4C994B08.7050509@xxxxxxxx> <BAY121-W688EF9F79369127219FB3DA600@xxxxxxx>, , <4C9A4B7A.3010308@xxxxxxxx>, <BAY121-W31394CA05B46D94F7DC8F8DA610@xxxxxxx>, <4C9BE0A9.40709@xxxxxxxx>, <BAY121-W4337007E1CA28BC7E72547DA660@xxxxxxx> <BAY121-W2087D6896693255FFB54C2DA660@xxxxxxx>, <4CA220D0.7070309@xxxxxxxx> <BAY121-W512F127F0819CA2E5DC3D2DA670@xxxxxxx> |
|
Sender: |
xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.9) Gecko/20100921 Fedora/3.1.4-1.fc13 Lightning/1.0b3pre Thunderbird/3.1.4 |
On 09/28/2010 11:01 PM, MaoXiaoyun wrote:
> Well， I just go throught the source of irqbalance, it shows that it
> balances the irq through
> updating /proc/irq/$irq/smp_affinity. That, in my understanding, set
> irq affinity is almost
> equal to irq migration.
Correct.
>
> I later find the NIC interrupt is not modified in dom0, so it is safe
> to set its affinity,
> but interrupt of xen event use handle_level_irq, set its affinity will
> subject to irq
> lost.
>
> Am I right?
I can't parse that sentence so I'm not sure. But if you have
successfully migrated the interrupt/evtchn to a different vcpu, then
there's no subsequent risk of lost events. The event loss can only
happen in the circumstance I mentioned earlier: when you migrate while
an event is being handled, and a second event occurs on the new cpu
before the first one has finished. So you need both bad timing and a
fairly high event delivery rate to trigger the problem.
J
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
|
|
| |
|
Home