Re: [Xen-devel] RE: Xen 4.1 rc1 test report

To:	"Wei, Gang" <gang.wei@xxxxxxxxx>, "Zheng, Shaohui" <shaohui.zheng@xxxxxxxxx>, "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject:	Re: [Xen-devel] RE: Xen 4.1 rc1 test report
From:	Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxx>
Date:	Tue, 25 Jan 2011 14:13:03 +0000
Cc:
Delivery-date:	Tue, 25 Jan 2011 06:13:53 -0800
Dkim-signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:sender:user-agent:date:subject:from:to :message-id:thread-topic:thread-index:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ez0ZmYPPEYf8kXdqBqM4aq6McxKii+zL/SQaNarXFIE=; b=x646RlPC+AxswjnmjqUBoMaPHUK1igD3RAcpLyLHJIo3Sofe0OWBbrINTWslCCnp9D 4x7OQQ3eLP2IJMADdgefqRJNgX4vhBzOndod+gTn/gxPK1SFfcwABtkIRT0lZHaQkJkd oG3gPF/0voJb2zRIZXoHOnbqChvAlR6jbXIVs=
Domainkey-signature:	a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=sender:user-agent:date:subject:from:to:message-id:thread-topic :thread-index:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=QPI/nSMbaWwDtssH1hLiHoQCOeNehVK4fxw7HJH+Zpglt9NCkkx1y6XIK2AGQq59V4 BJIvBsKI9939FTIOFiejqUq1NUe9jcgZ8DzJVfAUR4Xv5S2G/OewnHgT4hAtMU0PS35j rzBRUSeX/FcnETD4r+5jg4XlhJHpVpPPkjz+w=
Envelope-to:	www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to:	<F26D193E20BBDC42A43B611D1BDEDE712556378690@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
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/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe:	<http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender:	xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index:	Acu6GEBstpnTfIH/TdeQZvf0FjUZ0QAOlF+wAI5FPEAAA5TuuA==
Thread-topic:	[Xen-devel] RE: Xen 4.1 rc1 test report
User-agent:	Microsoft-Entourage/12.28.0.101117

On 25/01/2011 14:05, "Wei, Gang" <gang.wei@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> 3. Think about how we could prevent such cases from panic Xen.
> 
> Any ideas, hints, comments, suggestions or even fixes on it?

Either the domain destroy path should forcibly unbind pirqs, or a non-empty
set of pirq bindings should hold at least one reference to a domain, to
prevent it being destroyed+freed.

Is forcible unbinding ever dangerous to system stability? If not perhaps
that is best.

 -- Keir

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] RE: Xen 4.1 rc1 test report