Re: [Xen-devel] making xenstore domain easy configurable

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 28.06.16 at 15:59, <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> For xenstored running in the same domain as the toolstack, sockets are
> less overhead than the shared memory ring, as no hypercalls are
> involved.  There is also the unfortunate problem that one of the two
> linux devices for xenstored *still* causes deadlocks when used; a
> problem which is unresolved from Linux 3.14.

And these deadlocks aren't possibly related to the introduction
of FMODE_ATOMIC_POS, and hence would be resolved by
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/8752411/(or something along
those lines, if nonseekable_open() isn't used on that code path)?
I ask because we had a similar report, but when I put together the
(refused upstream) patch I assumed the files under /dev wouldn't
have the same issue (and I still didn't check whether they would).

Jan


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