[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/3] Don't create default ioreq server
On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 05:47:50PM +0800, Zhang Chen wrote: > The ioreq server make colo run failed. > > Signed-off-by: Zhang Chen <zhangchen.fnst@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Wen Congyang <wency@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c | 11 ----------- > 1 file changed, 11 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c > index 25dc759..8522852 100644 > --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c > @@ -5339,17 +5339,6 @@ static int hvmop_get_param( > case HVM_PARAM_IOREQ_PFN: > case HVM_PARAM_BUFIOREQ_PFN: > case HVM_PARAM_BUFIOREQ_EVTCHN: > - { > - domid_t domid; > - > - /* May need to create server. */ > - domid = d->arch.hvm_domain.params[HVM_PARAM_DM_DOMAIN]; > - rc = hvm_create_ioreq_server(d, domid, 1, > - HVM_IOREQSRV_BUFIOREQ_LEGACY, NULL); > - if ( rc != 0 && rc != -EEXIST ) > - goto out; > - } > - /*FALLTHRU*/ What is broken by ioreq server? I don't think you can change the code like this because this is definitely going to be wrong for other use cases -- try create a guest without COLO. If you can be more specific about what is broken in COLO we might be able to devise a fix for you. > default: > a.value = d->arch.hvm_domain.params[a.index]; > break; > -- > 2.7.4 > > > _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |