[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] test report for Xen 4.3 RC1
> -----Original Message----- > From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk [mailto:konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Saturday, June 22, 2013 2:18 AM > To: Ren, Yongjie > Cc: george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; Xu, YongweiX; Liu, SongtaoX; Tian, > Yongxue; xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] test report for Xen 4.3 RC1 > > > > > http://bugzilla-archived.xenproject.org//bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1851 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That looks like you are hitting the udev race. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Could you verify that these patches: > > > > > > > > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/5/13/520 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > fix the issue (They are destined for v3.11) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Not tried yet. I'll update it to you later. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We tested kernel 3.9.3 with the 2 patches you mentioned, and > found > > > this > > > > > > bug still exist. For example, we did CPU online-offline for Dom0 for > > > 100 > > > > > times, > > > > > > and found 2 times (of 100 times) failed. > > > > > > > > > > Hm, does it fail b/c udev can't online the sysfs entry? > > > > > > > > > I think no. > > > > When it fails to online CPU #3 (trying online #1~#3), it doesn't show > any > > > info > > > > about CPU #3 via the output of "devadm monitor --env" CMD. It does > > > show > > > > info about #1 and #2 which are onlined succefully. > > > > > > And if you re-trigger the the 'xl vcpu-set' it eventually comes back up > right? > > > > > We don't use 'xl vcpu-set' command when doing the CPU hot-plug. > > We just call the xc_cpu_online/offline() in tools/libxc/xc_cpu_hotplug.c to > test. > > Oh. That is very different than what I thought. You are not offlining/onlining > vCPUS - you offlining/onlining pCPUS! So Xen has to cramp the dom0 vCPUs > in the > remaining vCPUS. > > There should be no vCPU re-sizing correct? > Yes, for this case we do online/offline for pCPUs not vCPUs. (vCPU number doesn't change.) > > (see the attachment about my test code in that bugzilla.) > > And, yes, if a CPU failed to online, it can also be onlined again when we > re-trigger > > online function. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4. 'xl vcpu-set' can't decrease the vCPU number of a HVM > > > guest > > > > > > > > > > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1822 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That I believe was an QEMU bug: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2013-05/msg01054.html > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > which should be in QEMU traditional now (05-21 was when it > > > went > > > > > > > > > in the tree) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In this year or past year, this bug always exists (at least in > > > > > > > > our > > > > > testing). > > > > > > > > 'xl vcpu-set' can't decrease the vCPU number of a HVM guest > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Could you retry with Xen 4.3 please? > > > > > > > > > > > > > With Xen 4.3 & Linux:3.10.0-rc3, I can't decrease the vCPU > number of > > > a > > > > > guest. > > > > > > > > > sorry, when I said this message, I still use rhel6.4 kernel as the > > > > guest. > > > > After upgrading guest kernel to 3.10.0-rc3, the result became better. > > > > Basically vCPU increment/decrement can work fine. I'll close that > bug. > > > > > > Excellent! > > > > But there's still a minor issue as following. > > > > After booting guest with 'vcpus=4' and 'maxvcpus=32', change its > vCPU > > > number. > > > > # xl vcpu-set $domID 32 > > > > then you can only get less than 32 (e.g. 19) CPUs in the guest; again, > you > > > set > > > > vCPU number to 32 (from 19), then it works to get 32vCPU for the > guest. > > > > but 'xl vcpu-set $domID 8' can work fine as we expected. > > > > vCPU decrement has the same result. > > > > Can you also have a try to reproduce my issue? > > > > > This issue doesn't exist when using the latest QEMU traditional tree. > > My pervious QEMU was old (March 2013), and I found some of your > patches > > were applied in May 2013. These fixes can fix the issue we reported. > > Close this bug. > > Yes! > > > > But, it introduced another issue: when doing 'xl vcpu-set' for HVM > several > > times (e.g. 5 times), the guest will panic. Log is attached. > > Before your patches in qemu traditional tree in May 2013, we never > meet > > guest kernel panic. > > dom0: 3.10.0-rc3 > > Xen: 4.3.0-RCx > > QEMU: the latest traditional tree > > guest kernel: 3.10.0-RC3 > > I'll file another bug to track this bug ? > > Please. > > Can you reproduce this ? > > Could you tell me how you are doing 'xl vcpu-set'? Is there a particular > test script you are using? > 1. xl vcpu-set $domID 2 2. xl vcpu-set $domID 20 3. repeat step #1 and #2 for several times. (guest kernel panic ...) I also filed a bug in bugzilla to track this. You can get more info in the following link. http://bugzilla.xenproject.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1860 -- Jay > > > > > Sure. Now how many PCPUS do you have? And what version of QEMU > > > traditional > > > were you using? > > > > > There're 32 pCPU in that system we used. > > > > Best Regards, > > Yongjie (Jay) > _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |