This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Home Products Support Community News


Re: [Xen-devel] Re: blocking Xen 3.X production use: soft lockup bugs

To: Ian Pratt <m+Ian.Pratt@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Re: blocking Xen 3.X production use: soft lockup bugs
From: Steve Traugott <stevegt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2006 13:37:51 -0700
Cc: andrew.warfield@xxxxxxxxxxxx, xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Fri, 04 Aug 2006 13:38:25 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <A95E2296287EAD4EB592B5DEEFCE0E9D572309@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <A95E2296287EAD4EB592B5DEEFCE0E9D572309@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.9i
On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 01:59:20AM +0100, Ian Pratt wrote:
> > > Have you tried using -unstable and hence xen's new scheduler? This
> is
> > > less likely to provoke soft lockup false alarms.
> > 
> > Haven't tried unstable yet, since this is for the production
> > infrastructure for my family's business; am in the process of
> > rebuilding with testing changeset 9762 though.  (is that really tip?
> > hg log says Jun 29th for that changeset, even after a pull...)
> There have been no requests to back port patches since then. 
> If you can, its really worth trying -unstable. Any changeset from over
> last weekend should be just fine.

Ian, on your advice I skipped my -testing 9762 build and went straight
to -unstable 10868.  I can only saw *wow*!  Night and day difference
between 9732 and 10868.  See my message as of a few minutes ago for
the details, but at this point I'm considering taking 10868 into

I might want -unstable anyway; I'm starting to get to the point where
I can chase that blktap/AFS idea we were discussing with Andrew in
late 2004 - early 2005.  

Stephen G. Traugott  (KG6HDQ)
UNIX/Linux Infrastructure Architect, TerraLuna LLC
http://www.stevegt.com -- http://Infrastructures.Org

Xen-devel mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>