Re: [Xen-devel] Current LibXL Status

[Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Ian Campbell writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] Current LibXL Status"):
> The only one I can find which isn't one of this is
> in libxl__event_disaster, and that is only if the applications (or language
> bindings) haven't provided a suitable disaster callback.

libxl__event_disaster can currently happen in the following cases.

Disasters which are specific to a specific requested event (type!=0):

  xc_domain_getinfolist failure (breaks reporting domain death, only
  xw_write failure for acknowledging disk eject (breaks reporting
      ejects, only)

General disasters (type==0) due to xenstore problems:

  POLLERR or POLLHUP on xenstore fd
  xs_check_watch fails (represents trouble on xenstore fd or with xenstore)
  xs_read for domain death check

General disasters (type==0) due to hypercall trouble:

  xenevtchn_pending fails other than with EAGAIN
  (unrequested) event other than POLLIN on evtchn fd

General disasters (type==0) due to syscall failure:

  poll syscall fails
  (unrequested) event other than POLLIN on self-pipe
  read() or write() fails on a self-pipe (other than EAGAIN/EWOULDBLOCK)
  waitpid() syscall fails

General disasters (type==0) induced by the application:

  waitpid reports ECHILD when we know we have a child (probably,
    something else in the process reaped it; arguably this should abort)
  application's childproc_hooks->reaped_callback failure

Disasters are not reported unless it is impossible to proceed.  So in
general it is not possible for a process to recover from a disaster
reported by libxl.

But disasters are never expected.  They should occur only if
everything is totally doomed anyway.  Having a daemon crash is a
perfectly reasonable response.

Ian.

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