[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [PATCH] xen/console: do not drop serial output from the hardware domain
On 14.06.2022 08:52, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 03:56:54PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: >> On 13.06.2022 14:32, Roger Pau Monné wrote: >>> On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 11:18:49AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 13.06.2022 11:04, Roger Pau Monné wrote: >>>>> On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 10:29:43AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>>> On 13.06.2022 10:21, Roger Pau Monné wrote: >>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 09:30:06AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>>>>> On 10.06.2022 17:06, Roger Pau Monne wrote: >>>>>>>>> Prevent dropping console output from the hardware domain, since it's >>>>>>>>> likely important to have all the output if the boot fails without >>>>>>>>> having to resort to sync_console (which also affects the output from >>>>>>>>> other guests). >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Do so by pairing the console_serial_puts() with >>>>>>>>> serial_{start,end}_log_everything(), so that no output is dropped. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> While I can see the goal, why would Dom0 output be (effectively) more >>>>>>>> important than Xen's own one (which isn't "forced")? And with this >>>>>>>> aiming at boot output only, wouldn't you want to stop the overriding >>>>>>>> once boot has completed (of which, if I'm not mistaken, we don't >>>>>>>> really have any signal coming from Dom0)? And even during boot I'm >>>>>>>> not convinced we'd want to let through everything, but perhaps just >>>>>>>> Dom0's kernel messages? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I normally use sync_console on all the boxes I'm doing dev work, so >>>>>>> this request is something that come up internally. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Didn't realize Xen output wasn't forced, since we already have rate >>>>>>> limiting based on log levels I was assuming that non-ratelimited >>>>>>> messages wouldn't be dropped. But yes, I agree that Xen (non-guest >>>>>>> triggered) output shouldn't be rate limited either. >>>>>> >>>>>> Which would raise the question of why we have log levels for non-guest >>>>>> messages. >>>>> >>>>> Hm, maybe I'm confused, but I don't see a direct relation between log >>>>> levels and rate limiting. If I set log level to WARNING I would >>>>> expect to not loose _any_ non-guest log messages with level WARNING or >>>>> above. It's still useful to have log levels for non-guest messages, >>>>> since user might want to filter out DEBUG non-guest messages for >>>>> example. >>>> >>>> It was me who was confused, because of the two log-everything variants >>>> we have (console and serial). You're right that your change is unrelated >>>> to log levels. However, when there are e.g. many warnings or when an >>>> admin has lowered the log level, what you (would) do is effectively >>>> force sync_console mode transiently (for a subset of messages, but >>>> that's secondary, especially because the "forced" output would still >>>> be waiting for earlier output to make it out). >>> >>> Right, it would have to wait for any previous output on the buffer to >>> go out first. In any case we can guarantee that no more output will >>> be added to the buffer while Xen waits for it to be flushed. >>> >>> So for the hardware domain it might make sense to wait for the TX >>> buffers to be half empty (the current tx_quench logic) by preempting >>> the hypercall. That however could cause issues if guests manage to >>> keep filling the buffer while the hardware domain is being preempted. >>> >>> Alternatively we could always reserve half of the buffer for the >>> hardware domain, and allow it to be preempted while waiting for space >>> (since it's guaranteed non hardware domains won't be able to steal the >>> allocation from the hardware domain). >> >> Getting complicated it seems. I have to admit that I wonder whether we >> wouldn't be better off leaving the current logic as is. > > Another possible solution (more like a band aid) is to increase the > buffer size from 4 pages to 8 or 16. That would likely allow to cope > fine with the high throughput of boot messages. You mean the buffer whose size is controlled by serial_tx_buffer? On large systems one may want to simply make use of the command line option then; I don't think the built-in default needs changing. Or if so, then perhaps not statically at build time, but taking into account system properties (like CPU count). Jan
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |