|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] [RFC] Fix RegEx Issues with xendomains for both SXP and JSON outputs of lx list -l
----- Original Message -----
> From: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>
> To: Ian Murray <murrayie@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Joshua Tuttle
> <jtuttle@xxxxxxxxx>; Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; David Sutton
> <kantras@xxxxxxxxx>; "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Tuesday, 25 June 2013, 14:44
> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] [RFC] Fix RegEx Issues with xendomains for
both SXP and JSON outputs of lx list -l
>
> On Tue, 2013-06-25 at 11:56 +0100, Ian Murray wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> > From: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> > To: Ian Murray <murrayie@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> > Cc: "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx"
> <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; David Sutton <kantras@xxxxxxxxx>; Joshua
> Tuttle <jtuttle@xxxxxxxxx>; George Dunlap
> <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Ian Jackson
> <Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> > Sent: Tuesday, 25 June 2013, 10:40
>> > Subject: Re: [PATCH] [RFC] Fix RegEx Issues with xendomains for both
> SXP and
>> JSON outputs of lx list -l
>> >
>> > On Thu, 2013-06-20 at 13:00 +0100, Ian Murray wrote:
>> >> (Resent, as Yahoo seems to silently drop sentemail with the
> subject
>> >> starting with a square open bracket. Space inserted - apologies
> if
>> >> received more than once)
>> >
>> > How very unhelpful of them! FWIW This seems to be the first one which
>> > made it into the list archives as well as my INBOX.
>> >
>> > I'm working through my post-vacation backlog this morning but I
> hope to
>> > have a chance to look at this vs. 4.3-rc soon since I think it is a
>> > worthwhile bugfix for 4.3. George, what does your release
> manager's hat
>> > think?
>>
>> There are white space issues with this patch on this thread as it is,
>> so I re-issued it more recently directly from git, as is the preferred
>> method I think.
>
> It's certainly less error prone. Do you have the message-id handy so I
> can find the right version?
>
Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2013 13:38:11 +0100
Message-Id: <1371904691-9842-1-git-send-email-murrayie@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> As was suggested by David Sutton, there are probably more issues with
>> this script than has been covered so far, but this change makes
>> suspension and restoration work for me, at least. He suggests there
>> are problems with zombies, etc.
>
> You mean the handling of zombies by this script, rather than it somehow
> causing zombies?
Yes, handling of zombies.
>
> Zombie domains are already themselves a bug in and of themselves so if
> that can be reproduced we'd like to hear about it, as for the script's
> handling of those zombies if/when they occur, I think it's probably
> something to deal with in 4.4.
This is something that David Sutton made comment on the original "users"
thread. Without looking back, I seem to recall he'd spotted a bug in the
xendomains script's handling rather than experiencing it. I have no experience
of the issue. The reason for mentioning it was I just wanted to comment that my
patch and testing wasn't a designed to fix all issues with xendomains, just the
ones I had experience of.
>
>> >> Modifications to xendomains so that it correctly identifies a new
> domain
>> >> entry when parsing the output of xl list -l. For both SXP and
> JSON
>> >> outputs, it was failing to spot a new domain entry and was saving
> the
>> >> second domain under a filename generated from the first
> domain's name.
>> >>
>> >> I have listed this as RFC because although it is a patch against
> 4.3RC5,
>> >> I have not had a chance to test against RC5, only 4.2.2. I
> won't get an
>> >> opportunity until the weekend, so I invite comment and anybody to
> give
>> >> it a test against RC5. Ian C has already commented elsewhere that
> the xl
>> >> list -l JSON output has been altered between 4.2.x and 4.3RC5, so
> this
>> >> might affect the indentation (the 4 spaces in the middle of the
>> >> LIST_GREP variable) - the trigger for new domain data is '
> {' in
>> > JSON
>> >> version (in at least 4.2.2) and '(domain' in SXP version.
> Not
>> > tested
>> >> against xm.
>> >>
>> >> It seems there is a problem in 4.2.2's implementation of SXP
> output of
>> >> xl list -l in that all domain ID's are outputted as -1. Ian C
> suggested
>> >> applying a change that originally went into 4.3 to resolve this
> issue.
>> >> This seemed to do the trick (see thread [Xen-users] DomU
>> >> suspension/hibernation )
>> >
>> > Would you be able to submit that backport as a patch against the 4.2
>> > staging branch and CC myself and Ian Jackson
>> > <ian.jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> ?
>> >
>> > This isn't a straight forward backport, since the majority of the
> commit
>> > is not a suitable candidate, but if you reference in the commit
> message
>> > the original commit id/subject and point out that only the one hunk is
> a
>> > useful bug fix which is why it's been split out then I think it
> would be
>> > fine to have in the next 4.2 release.
>>
>> I'll give this a go, but it will be a learning experience. I don't
>> recall seeing any backporting info in the patch submission notes but I
>> will take another look.
>
> Thanks. It's not that common to have to do things this way (mostly we
> take the entire patch) so there isn't much in the way of docs. If you
> just treat it for the most part like a regular submission and explain
> what is going on in the commit message with references to the original
> commit ID and title then you won't go far wrong.
>
>> Who signs a (partial) backport off? Can't be me, because I didn't
>> write it. Or can it? or is it copied from the original submission?
>
> I think it would be appropriate to retain the original signed-off-by(s)
> and acks etc and append your own. Some people like to do:
>
> Commit message
>
> Signed-off-by: Original Author <original.author@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Acked-by:
>
> Backported to X.Y
>
> Signed-off-by: Back Porter <bporter@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Or something like that, which is fine IMHO. Or if your commit message
> makes it clear enough what is going on then just tacking your S-o-b onto
> the original blocks of S-o-b's would be fine.
>
> Ian J, does that sound about right? The issue is that one hunk of
> a73a7a0c647a "xl: Remove global domid and enable -Wshadow" is actually
> a
> useful fix but the commit as a whole is large and unsuitable for
> backporting IMHO.
>
Okay, will look into it.
> Ian.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
>
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |