Re: [Xen-users] Dom0 crashed when rebooting whilst DomU are running

[Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 2012-09-12 at 22:31 +0100, Maik Brauer wrote:
> On Sep 12, 2012, at 10:13 AM, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > The default is "vif-bridge". Have you changed the default?
> 
> No I did not change this default script. Everything is at is has been 
> delivered in the Xen Source package.

No, it isn't, you say below that you have changed xend-config.sxp

> > 
> > If not then your configuration as shown will put three interfaces on the
> > *same* bridge. Is this really what you want?
> 
> No, because it will "not" put everything on the same bridge, because the 
> default setting is "routed mode" due to the fact that
> my providers network configuration has changed the routing. Therefore in 
> xend-config.sxp we have the following disabled:
> #(network-script network-route)
> #(vif-script     vif-route)
> 
> and the next one enabled:
> (network-script network-route)
> (vif-script     vif-route)

So you have changed the default then, haven't you! You have edited
xend-config.sxp to change the default vif-script and network-script!

What else have you changed from the defaults?

> So basically you can see them as placeholder for the eth1, eth2 and eth4 
> devices in the Guest domU.
> For the other 2 interfaces it is different. They should be bridged (different 
> from default).

Do you mean routed here? Do you understand the difference between
routing and bridging?

>  Therefore I have to
> put the "script=vif-bridge" in the config as shown above. See below the 
> output of brctl show:
> bridge name   bridge id               STP enabled     interfaces
> VLAN11                8000.000000000000       no              
> VLAN12                8000.000000000000       no              
> VLAN20                8000.feffffffffff       no              vif2.3
> VLAN30                8000.000000000000       no              
> VLAN40                8000.feffffffffff       no              vif2.5
> 
> > 
> > You claim above that the bridge is different for each interface, but
> > unless you have changed something somewhere then this is not the case.
> > Since you are having problems it is important to identify everything
> > which you have changed from the defaults.
> 
> No, I am saying that the bridge name is different. Not that the script is 
> different. I am just creating isolated bridges
> VLAN20, VLAN30, VLAN40, and so on in order to connect special network 
> interfaces together from different domU's.

Except it turns out that half your interfaces aren't even using bridging
and aren't using vif-bridge at all!

Please, it is important to give all the facts and to be precise when you
are asking people to debug a remote system.

> >>>> List is empty. SysRQ -w and SysRQ-t shows nothing at all.
> >>> 
> >>> You might need to increase the log verbosity with SysRQ-9 first?
> >> 
> >> I did and now I got more Information. But due to the amount of data
> which slips over the console screen I am not able
> >> to record properly. Can you advice what to do here?

Did you try SysRQ-w -- given the point at which your logs show the hang
this should provide a much smaller amount of output than Sysrq-l and be
much more manageable. In particular it will be useful to know what the
"xenwatch" and "reboot" processes are waiting for.

> > Did you add debugging to the hotplug scripts like I suggested a couple
> > of mails back?
> 
> No I didn't up to now.

Please do. For both the vif-bridge and vif-route scripts.

Ian.


_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-users