Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-unstable test] 12876: tolerable FAIL - PUSHED

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 15.05.12 at 12:27, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
> On Tue, 15 May 2012, Ian Campbell wrote:
>> >  After having fixed
>> > the gntdev driver in our kernels and the pvops-centric shortcomings in
>> > both qemu-s, the qdisk backend still looks somewhat unreliable in
>> > testing that Olaf has performed. We haven't narrowed it so far, but
>> > a resulting question of course is whether using that backend (and/or
>> > qemu-upstream) by default for any guests is a good idea.
>> 
>> CCing Stefano who made the patch to have PV guests use this guy. Please
>> do share details when you have them.
> 
> I would prefer precise bug reports, and possibly patches, to "somewhat
> unreliable" :-)

Of course. But we barely got past all the basic issues...

> Please note that the userspace disk backend is basically the same in
> upstream QEMU and qemu-xen-traditional,

I understand that, ...

> so switching back to the old
> QEMU for pv guests wouldn't improve anything.

... and I didn't mean to suggest that. I was rather trying to hint
towards continuing to use blkback as default backend.

Jan


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel