Von: Paul Durrant
<Paul.Durrant@xxxxxxxxxx>
An: Pasi Kärkkäinen <pasik@xxxxxx>
CC: Giovanni Bellac <giovannib1979@xxxxxxxxx>; Ian Campbell
<Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx"
<xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
"xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Gesendet: Dienstag, den 7. September 2010, 16:01:14 Uhr
Betreff: RE: AW: [Xen-devel] Re: [Xen-users] Re: Xen 4.0 - Support for
Citrix WHQL-certified Windows PV drivers
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Pasi Kärkkäinen [mailto:pasik@xxxxxx]
> Sent: 07 September 2010 14:46
> To: Paul Durrant
> Cc: Giovanni Bellac; Ian Campbell; xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: AW: [Xen-devel] Re: [Xen-users] Re: Xen 4.0 - Support
> for Citrix WHQL-certified Windows PV drivers
>
> On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 01:26:04PM +0100, Paul Durrant wrote:
> > Presumably the tools are creating a
/local/domain/3/console/0
> entry if you
> > don't specify VNC; it's another example of the same
issue you
> saw before.
> >
> > The Citrix PV drivers are not routinely tested on
xen-unstable;
> you need
> > to tweak your tools to give them the environment they
expect
> (which is
> > that the only thing under /local/domain/XXX/device are
vbd and
> vif nodes).
> >
>
> I guess the behaviour of Citrix PV drivers has changed recently?
> The drivers from XCP 0.1.x worked OK on Xen 4.0 earlier..
>
I don't think so. I think the fe close code has been static for a while,
whereas the tools, mostly libxl, have seen massive churn of late.
Paul
