Re: [Xen-users] Xen dom0 on debian, what is the most recent but stable solution?

[philip tricca <flihp@xxxxxxxxx>]

Joseph M. Deming wrote:
> Kernel seems to ALMOST work for me, but VIF interfaces seem positively
> bugged beyond functional use.  See
> http://bugzilla.xensource.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1612
> for exact issue I am currently trying to work through.  The 2.6.26 as
> dom0 kernel and any kernel up to 2.6.32-3 as domU I can verify works in
> most environments.  Some newer hardware (SAS6 MegaRAID card for
> instance) shipping with new Dells fail to boot the 2.26 dom0 kernel and
> 2.18 lacks driver support for it.
>
> Just some random usability feedback from my own testing and usage, I
> can't verify absolute stability or promise that my issues aren't simply
> configuration-based, but that's my experience.
>
> On Mon, 2010-05-24 at 19:02 +0300, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> > On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 11:50:23AM -0400, Mike Viau wrote:
> > >    > On Mon, 24 May 2010 15:13:00 +0300 <pasik@xxxxxx> wrote:
> > >    >
> > >    > Remember Linux 2.6.32 pvops dom0 kernels require at least Xen 4.0 to
> > >    work properly.
> > >    > Upcoming Xen 3.4.3 will (partly) support pvops dom0 kernels aswell..
> > >    >
> > >
> > >    Pasi, I thought that the xen 3.4.3 xen hypervisor was supposed to work on
> > >    pvops kernels. I had a 2.6.32 pvops kernel working, altough some users
> > >    reported problems on the list with this combination. I also believe 2.6.31
> > >    pvops was tested to work as well. Personally 2.6.33 pvops is untested.
> > 2.6.31 pvops dom0 doesn't require the new IOAPIC related hypercalls.
> >
> > 2.6.32 and newer pvops dom0 kernels require the new IOAPIC hypercalls from Xen.
> > Xen 4.0.0 was the first one to introduce that hypercall.
> >
> > Some of the patches related to it are backported to Xen 3.4.3, but not all.
> >
> > Based on the various discussion on xen-devel it seems Xen 3.4.3 + 2.6.32 pvops 
> > dom0
> > works for some, and doesn't for others.
> >
> > It's recommended to use Xen 4.0.0 + 2.6.32 pvops dom0, since that's the 
> > supported
> > and recommended configuration.
> >
> > -- Pasi
> >
> > >    -M
> > >
> > >    --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >
> > >    30 days of prizes: Hotmail makes your day easier! [1]Enter now
> > >
> > > References
> > >
> > >    Visible links
> > >    1. http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=9729704
Figure I'd chime in: I'm up against the same bug.  Xen 4.0.0 and pvops
dom0 2.6.32-13 (amd64) from Jeremy's git tree on a x200 Lenovo running a
mixed squeeze/sid.  I'm getting the same NULL ref in netback_uevent (bug
1612).  Funny thing is if the network is hosted from dom0 vif still
comes up and works but when the NIC is bound to a driver domain the
error causes a command like:

'xm netowrk-attach domU backend=driver_domU'

to fail complaining the hotplug scripts failed to run.  The kernel OOPS
is then visible in the driver domain.

The result is the same for the pvops 2.6.31.13 kernel and the
linux-image-2.6.32-5-xen-amd64 kernel packaged in debian sid.  If anyone
comes up with a work around for this or a relatively recent kernel that
works I'd be interested.

I wasn't able to get the 2.6.26 kernel from Lenny to boot Squeeze, any 
advice there would be great to hold me over till 1612 gets squashed.
Cheers,
- Philip

--
Ruin is the destination toward which all men rush,
each pursuing his own best interest.


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