Re: [Xen-devel] PATCH: Fix name uniqueness check

["Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Oct 01, 2007 at 02:57:18PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 01, 2007 at 06:36:17AM +0100, Keir Fraser wrote:
> > On 27/9/07 21:40, "Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> > >> Unstable, but not 3.1.1, also has
> > >> 
> > >>   http://xenbits2.xensource.com/xen-unstable.hg?rev/207582c8d88b
> > >> 
> > >> I did a little testing on a 3.1-based system that includes the above c/s
> > >> and your reversion of c/s 15124.  No problems noticed testing create,
> > >> new, reboot, save, restore.  Did not test migration or hvm guests.  So
> > >> perhaps reverting 15124 is fine for unstable but not sure about 3.1.1
> > >> *without* c/s 15642.
> > > 
> > > Yep, I just tested 3.1.1 with 15124 reverted, and 15642 applied and it 
> > > copes
> > > with the use cases I have. So I'd reckon on making those two changes to 
> > > the
> > > 3.1-testing tree would be sufficient.
> > 
> > Is this still wanted? Masaki Kanno's response seems to indicate there are
> > still issues.
> 
> I need to try and reproduce Masaki's results & figure out what's missing.
> We definitely need some form of patch, because as it stands two important
> use cases are broken for xen-3.1-testing - provisioning of new VMs wit the
> virt-install tool being one of them. I'd rather reduce the strictness of
> name uniqueness checks to be too leniant than be too strict and break things

There are 6 basic test cases:

   a. same name + same UUID:
   b. diff name + same UUID:
   c. same name + diff UUID:
   d. diff name + diff UUID:
   e. same name + no UUID:
   f. diff name + no UUID:

These need to be tested with 'xm create' and 'xm new', and all tests need to
be done with the pre-existing VM both inactive, and active.

As it stands now, 3.1-testing  incorrectly rejects several of the test
cases. It also incorrectly allows several others. 

Adding in http://xenbits2.xensource.com/xen-unstable.hg?rev/207582c8d88b
from xen-unstable causes it to incorrectly allow sevaral more, and does
not fix the false rejects.

Reverting 15124:f5459c358575  removes the false rejects, but doesn't
deal with the false allows.

So no combination of patches from either 3.1-testing, or -unstable is
showing completely correct behaviour & both trees need further fixes.
Hopefully have something more later today...

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