[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [Xen-devel] Hotplug scripts not working... xen/ia64 domU stopped working

  • To: "Ewan Mellor" <ewan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • From: "Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins)" <dan.magenheimer@xxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2005 16:39:03 -0800
  • Cc: Xen Mailing List <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Delivery-date: Fri, 02 Dec 2005 00:38:56 +0000
  • List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
  • Thread-index: AcX20F37CKVx/KcvQ5yGh3gUYhci0wAB20WA
  • Thread-topic: [Xen-devel] Hotplug scripts not working... xen/ia64 domU stopped working

> > By "put logging into" do you mean adding a '-x' at the end
> > of the first (bin/sh) line?  If so, where is the logging going?
> > (not to the console nor to /var/log/xend.log...)  Sorry...
> > it's been awhile since I've done script debugging and it's
> > definitely a lot different than hypervisor debugging :-}
> Doing that writes to stderr, which unfortunately is going 
> straight down
> /dev/null, because this is being run by the kernel's hotplug 
> infrastruture.
> You can either use echo "Message" >~/my-log to write to a log 
> file of your own,
> or log err "Message" to write to syslog (once you have included
> xen-hotplug-common.h).

Any suggestions as to where in the file would be illuminating?
And where is "syslog"? (not in /var/log... it's a RHEL3 system)
> > Status: cset 8006 and cset 8029 both work fine.  Cset 8054 fails
> > with the "Hotplug scripts not working" message.  This narrows
> > the field considerably.  Cset 8043 and 8049 look suspicious.
> > For 8043, I thought maybe there is a dependency on the newly
> > added arch_memory_op call, but flagged that for ia64 and it
> > doesn't appear to be the case.  Cset 8049: This isn't intended
> > to stop use of a disk-in-a-file via the loopback driver, is it?
> No, it's intended to protect you from mounting the same file 
> twice in this way,
> but not to stop you from doing it the once.  If this check 
> was failing, you
> would get a different error message anyway.  You might try 
> using 'w!' as the
> mode in your vbd config file rather than 'w'.  This will 
> bypass the checks,
> which at least would point the figure at that particular 
> chunk of code.

I can confirm now that cset 8048 works and 8049 does not.
Using 'w!' does not make any difference.  I don't see any
changes in the changeset that look particularly interesting
from an ia64 perspective.  Do you see anything new that might
reach into the hypervisor that didn't before?  Or perhaps
something new with evtchn (which has some differences on ia64)?

Any help/suggestions would be appreciated as we'd really like
to get Xen/ia64 working again before 3.0.


Xen-devel mailing list



Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.