Jim Fehlig wrote:
> Shriram Rajagopalan wrote:
>
>> I was just looking over the patch on blkif.py and I believe there is a bug.
>> --- a/tools/python/xen/util/blkif.py Fri Dec 10 18:08:19 2010 +0000
>> +++ b/tools/python/xen/util/blkif.py Wed Jan 05 23:31:24 2011 +0000
>> @@ -71,15 +71,8 @@ def _parse_uname(uname):
>> if uname.find(":") != -1:
>> (typ, fn) = uname.split(":", 1)
>>
>> - if typ == "phy" and not fn.startswith("/"):
>> + if typ in ("phy", "drbd") and not fn.startswith("/"):
>> fn = "/dev/%s" %(fn,)
>> -
>> - if typ == "drbd":
>> - if not fn.startswith("drbd"):
>> - (drbdadmstdin, drbdadmstdout) =
>> os.popen2(["/sbin/drbdadm", "sh-dev", fn])
>> - fn = drbdadmstdout.readline().strip()
>> - else:
>> - fn = "/dev/%s" %(fn,)
>>
>> if typ in ("tap", "tap2"):
>> (taptype, fn) = fn.split(":", 1
>>
>>
>> When you specify a drbd disk for a domU, its format is
>> drbd:<resourceName>
>>
>>
>
> Correct. Sadly, I forgot I was testing on SLES, which contains local
> xend patches to fix problems wrt external block scripts. One of the
> patches has existed for ages, before many of us were working on xen
> :-). I would really like to get these changes upstream, even though
> xend is dying. The first patch is a revert of
> http://xenbits.xensource.com/xen-unstable.hg?rev/152257350930. The
> second patch, which I've rebased against -unstable, is attached. Can
> you test it?
>
Shriram,
Have you had a chance to test my suggestion above (reverting c/s 19444
and using the xend patch we have in SuSE)? It has been working well for
us, but another "Tested-by:" may convince upstream to take these changes
as well. Perhaps it is too late for 4.1 as we're at RC2 already.
Thanks!
Jim
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
Home