xen-devel
RE: [Xen-devel] Domain 0 stop response on frequently reboot VMS
Hi Daniel:
Sorry for tht late response, and really thanks for your kindly suggestion.
Well, I believe we will upgrade to the lastest kernel in the coming future, but currently
we perfer to maintain for stable reason.
Our kernel version is 2.6.31. Now I am going through the change set of blktap to get
more detail info.
thanks.
> Subject: RE: [Xen-devel] Domain 0 stop response on frequently reboot VMS > From: daniel.stodden@xxxxxxxxxx > To: tinnycloud@xxxxxxxxxxx; jeremy@xxxxxxxx > CC: keir@xxxxxxx; xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 14:17:50 -0700 > > > I'd strongly suggest to try upgrading your kernel, or at least the > blktap component. The condition below is new to me, but that wait_queue > file and some related code was known to be buggy and has long since been > removed. > > If you choose to only upgrade blktap from tip, let me know what kernel > version you're dealing with, you might need to backport some of the > device queue macros to match your version's needs. > > Daniel > > > On Sat, 2010-10-16 at 01:39 -0400, MaoXiaoyun wrote: > > Well, Thanks Keir. > > Fortunately we caught the bug, it turned out to be a tapdisk problem. &g
t; > A brief explaination for other guys might confront this issue. > > > > Clear BLKTAP_DEFERRED on line 19 will lead to the concurrent access > > of > > tap->deferred_queue between line 24 and 37, which will finally cause > > bad > > pointer of tap->deferred_queue, and infinte loop in while clause in > > line 22. > > Lock line 24 will be a simple fix. > > > > /linux-2.6-pvops.git/drivers/xen/blktap/wait_queue.c > > 9 void > > 10 blktap_run_deferred(void) > > 11 { > > 12 LIST_HEAD(queue); > > 13 struct blktap *tap; > > 14 unsigned long flags; > > 15 > > 16 spin_lock_irqsave(&deferred_work_lock, flags); > > 17 list_splice_init(&deferred_work_queue, &queue); > > 18 list_for_each_entry(tap, &queue, deferred_queue) > > 19 clear_bit(BLKTAP_DEFERRED, &tap->d
ev_inuse); > > 20 spin_unlock_irqrestore(&deferred_work_lock, flags); > > 21 > > 22 while (!list_empty(&queue)) { > > 23 tap = list_entry(queue.next, struct blktap, > > deferred_queue); > > 24 &nb sp; list_del_init(&tap->deferred_queue); > > 25 blktap_device_restart(tap); > > 26 } > > 27 } > > 28 > > 29 void > > 30 blktap_defer(struct blktap *tap) > > 31 { > > 32 unsigned long flags; > > 33 > > 34 spin_lock_irqsave(&deferred_work_lock, flags); > > 35 if (!test_bit(BLKTAP_DEFERRED, &tap->dev_inuse)) { > > 36 set_bit(BLKTAP_DEFERRED, &tap->dev_inuse); > > 37 list_add_tail(&tap->deferred_queue, &deferred_work_queue); > > 38 } > > 39 spin_unlock_irqrestore(&deferred_work_lock, f lags); > > 40 } > > > > &g
t; > > Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2010 13:57:09 +0100 > > > Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Domain 0 stop response on frequently reboot > > VMS > > > From: keir@xxxxxxx > > > To: tinnycloud@xxxxxxxxxxx; xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > > > > You'll probably want to see if you can get SysRq output from dom0 > > via serial > > > line. It's likely you can if it is alive enough to respond to ping. > > This > > > might tell you things like what all processes are getting blocked > > on, and > > > thus indicate what is stopping dom0 from making progress. > > > > > > -- Keir > > > > > > On 15/10/2010 13:43, "MaoXiaoyun" <tinnycloud@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Keir: > > > > > > > > First, I'd like to express my appr
eciation for the help your > > offered > > > > before. > > > > Well, recently we confront a rather nasty domain 0 no response > > > > problem. > > > > > > > > We still have 12 HVMs almost continuously and con currently reboot > > > > test on a physical server. > > > > A few hours later, the server looks like dead. We only can ping to > > > > the server and get right response, > > > > the Xen works fine since we can get debug info from serial port. > > Attached is > > > > the full debug output. > > > > After decode the domain 0 CPU stack, I find the CPU still works > > for domain 0 > > > > since the stack changed > > > > info changed every time I dumped. > > > > > > > > Could help to take a look at the attentchment to see wheth
er there > > are > > > > some hints for debugging this > > > > problem. Thanks in advance. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Xen-devel mailing list > > > > Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel > > > > > > > >
|
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
|
|