[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen: drop writing error messages to xenstore
On 11/10/2018 13:03, Joao Martins wrote: > On 10/11/2018 06:05 AM, Juergen Gross wrote: >> On 10/10/2018 18:57, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: >>> On 10/10/18 11:53 AM, Juergen Gross wrote: >>>> On 10/10/2018 17:09, Joao Martins wrote: >>>>> On 10/09/2018 05:09 PM, Juergen Gross wrote: >>>>>> xenbus_va_dev_error() will try to write error messages to Xenstore >>>>>> under the error/<dev-name>/error node (with <dev-name> something like >>>>>> "device/vbd/51872"). This will fail normally and another message >>>>>> about this failure is added to dmesg. >>>>>> >>>>>> I believe this is a remnant from very ancient times, as it was added >>>>>> in the first pvops rush of commits in 2007. >>>>>> >>>>>> So remove the additional message when writing to Xenstore failed as >>>>>> a minimum step. >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Juergen Gross <jgross@xxxxxxxx> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> I am considering removing the Xenstore write altogether, but I'm >>>>>> not sure it isn't needed e.g. by xend based installations. So please >>>>>> speak up in case you know why this write is there. >>>>> So this: >>>>> >>>>> "This will fail normally and another message about this failure is added >>>>> to dmesg." >>>>> >>>>> Brings me to the question: What about {stub,driver}domains? Ideally you >>>>> shouldn't be looking at domU's dmesg as a control domain no? I can't >>>>> remember >>>>> any other error node, but if something fails e.g. netfront fails to >>>>> allocate an >>>>> unbound event channel - how do you know the cause from the control domain >>>>> perspective? >>>>> >>>>> Irrespective of xend or not: isn't this 'error' node the only one that >>>>> propagates error causes per device from domU? >>>> What does it help you in dom0 if you have an error message in Xenstore >>>> if a frontend driver couldn't do its job? Is there anything you can do >>>> as a Xen admin? >>> >>> The admin may want to know, for example, that a hotplug in the guest failed. >> >> Shouldn't he ask the guest for that? There are dozens of other possible >> problems letting hotplug fail which won't write anything to Xenstore. >> > But I think nothing stops people from using their own hotplug script that > could > use this error node (or even something else). > >> This might be interesting for development/test purposes, but I really >> question it to stay in mature code. >> > You're right in all of it: it doesn't convey the error in a agnostic manner, > ATM > doesn't report all errors involved in the device setup, and when a > xenbus_dev_fatal happens you might end up looking at the guest anyways. But > there might be users right now of this node e.g. cases where you have a bunch > of > known/trusted Linux guests working as backends (which also use this error > node, > it's not just frontends *I think*) which you would be able to recognize the > error messages to inform the admin e.g. maybe QubesOS? It is merely an > informative error message node, but it seems better than just a simple > XenbusClosed state, with many reasons that it could lead to. Anyhow, just my > 2c. If there are any users this will be in rather old Xen versions only, as writing the Xenstore node is _failing_ with newer Xen versions (that was the original reason for writing that patch). So back to my patch: any reason not to take it? After all it will only remove the not very helpful kernel message that writing the Xenstore node failed. Juergen _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |