Re: [Xen-devel] Is: Xen 4.2 and using 'xl' to save/restore is buggy with PVHVM Linux guests (v3.10 and v3.11 and presumarily earlier as well). Works with Xen 4.3 and Xen 4.4. Was:Re: FAILURE 3.11.0-rc7upstream(x86_64) 3.11.0-rc7upstream(i386)\: 2013-08-26 (tst001)

[Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 11:54:32AM +0100, George Dunlap wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 2:54 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
> <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > After a bit of digging I found out that Xen 4.2 'xl' (but not 'xm')
> > has some badness in it. When "migrating" ('xl' save followed by 'xl' 
> > restore')
> > the PVHVM guests (and only PVHVM) end up dying. The best theory I came up
> > with is that they don't have the shared_info setup correctly as the guest
> > is not receiving any events.
> 
> [snip]
> 
> > Once more I need to stress that it works great when using 'xm' in Xen 4.2
> > but fails over when using 'xl' in Xen 4.2.
> >
> > I can't recall whether 'xl' in Xen 4.2 was considered experiemental or
> > production ready at that point?
> 
> I'm pretty sure in 4.2 xl was the favored toolstack -- it was only 4.1
> in which we considered it experimental.
> 
> This works in 4.3, though?  Maybe there was a fix that didn't get backported?

Yes, it does work there.

And I also make sure to use the same version of QEMU in both places - the
traditional one. Not that it would make a big difference.

> 
> Ian J, do we test PVHVM suspend/resume in osstest?

.. Using the traditional or the the SeaBIOS?

> 
>  -George

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel