[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-users] Dom0 crashed when rebooting whilst DomU are running
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
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |