RE: [Xen-ia64-devel] [PATCH] Fixed VTI domain destruction

["Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx>]

>From: Masaki Kanno
>Sent: 2006年3月24日 19:56
>
>Hi Xiantao,
>
>That's great!!
>What was the cause of a issue?

Hi, Kan,
        Fortunately we've cleaned up the patch and sent it out. The major 
problem is that there're two different irq handlers one for VTI and another 
for non-VTI, due to some historical reason disappearing now. The VTI 
version wasn't enhanced to handle IA64_IPI_VECTOR when host SMP 
was added. So when destroying domU, tlb_flush_all will send out an 
IA64_IPI_VECTOR to the LP where domVTI is running. Since VTI path 
doesn't handle that IPI vector, it's instead injected back to dom0 and 
handle_IPI is not called. When this scenario happens, dom0 will fall into 
dead loop to wait call function started. That's it. :-)


        Now we can destroy domU (domU+domVTI), and domVTI (two 
domVTIs) safely. You may give it a try to see whether working in your 
side.

Thanks,
Kevin
>
>Best regards,
> Kan
>
>Zhang, Xiantao wrote:
>>Hi Masaki,
>>      Two domain destroy issue has been fixed. The patch will be sent out
>next week. Your destroy patch is very helpful
>to community developers :)
>>Thanks & Best regards
>>-Xiantao
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: xen-ia64-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> [mailto:xen-ia64-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
>You,
>>> Yongkang
>>> Sent: 2006定3埖23晩 16:04
>>> To: Masaki Kanno
>>> Cc: xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Subject: RE: [Xen-ia64-devel] [PATCH] Fixed VTI domain destruction
>>>
>>> Masaki,
>>>
>>> Your patch is really important and great helpful! Needn't sorry. ;)
>>> I am playing some auto testing to try to give more accurate result in
>time.
>>>
>>> I also found another similar bug before that patch. If I create 1 xenU
>and 1
>>> VTI, destroying xenU will cause the whole system hang.
>>>
>>> Best Regards,
>>> Yongkang (Kangkang) 喟慎
>>>
>>> >-----Original Message-----
>>> >From: Masaki Kanno [mailto:kanno.masaki@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
>>> >Sent: 2006定3埖23晩 15:29
>>> >To: You, Yongkang
>>> >Cc: xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> >Subject: Re: [Xen-ia64-devel] [PATCH] Fixed VTI domain
>destruction
>>> >
>>> >Hi Yongkang,
>>> >
>>> >I'm sorry. I was hasty. I carried out a test to repeat that
>>> >created/destroyed only one VTI domain. I don't know the
>>> >cause why a system was hung up.
>>> >
>>> >Best regards,
>>> > Kan
>>> >
>>> >You, Yongkang wrote:
>>> >>Hi Masaki,
>>> >>
>>> >>It is a great patch! I have tried the latest Cset about the destroying
>VTI
>>> >Domain. But a bug induced in. :)
>>> >>
>>> >>If 1 VTI domain, it is okay. But if 2 VTI domain is created, destroy 1
>VTI
>>> will
>>> >hang whole system.
>>> >>
>>> >>Best Regards,
>>> >>Yongkang (Kangkang) 牋風
>>> >>
>>> >>>-----Original Message-----
>>> >>>From: xen-ia64-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> >>>[mailto:xen-ia64-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
>Of
>>> >Masaki
>>> >>>Kanno
>>> >>>Sent: 2006協3・Q2賦 20:24
>>> >>>To: xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> >>>Subject: [Xen-ia64-devel] [PATCH] Fixed VTI domain destruction
>>> >>>
>>> >>>Hi,
>>> >>>
>>> >>>This patch fixed the VTI domain destruction processing.
>>> >>>I tested creation/destruction domU. The "domU" which I tested is
>>> >>>VTI domain and non VTI domain. There was not the memory leak
>>> >>>issue, and VTI domain is not left in a zombie state.
>>> >>>
>>> >>>Signed-off-by: Masaki Kanno <kanno.masaki@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>Best regards,
>>> >>> Kan
>>> >>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
>>> Xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel
>>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
>Xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel

_______________________________________________
Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
Xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel