[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] libxl: stat the path for all non-qdisk backends (including unknown)

On 10/05/13 14:49, Ian Campbell wrote:
On Fri, 2013-05-10 at 14:46 +0100, George Dunlap wrote:
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 3:29 PM, Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Fri, 2013-04-26 at 15:17 +0100, Sylvain Munaut wrote:
Since the intention of that commit was to allow for qdisk backends with no
explicit file in dom0 (i.e. network remote backend such as ceph) the lowest
impact fix appears to be to make that explicit. This should probably be
revisited to rationalize the probing.
What about the remote disk case of blktap ?  blktap2.5 supports NBD
already AFAIK
and I'm pretty sure I'll hit that same stat issue soon for another
remote blktap case.
Right, sounds like I should have gone with my first instinct which was:


 From 884beff4a897d785f61705dcfa2f048536982d7c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2013 12:41:43 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] libxl: stat the path for all non-qdisk backends (including 

The commit a8a1f236a296 "libxl: Only call stat() when adding a disk if we
expect a device to exist." changed things to only stat the file when the phy
backend was explicitly requested. This broke the case where we are probing and
would normally be able to decide on the phy option.
So at the moment qdisk backends aren't checked at all with this --
which means that if you give a path to a file that doesn't exist via,
for example, xl cd-insert, things fail in weird ways:

1. In qemu-traditional, the command silently completes; the effect is
that the disk currently in the drive is ejected

2. in qemu-upstream, qmp returns an error which is reported.  The disk
is ejected from the guest, but the xenstore entries are not updated
(still contain the old values)

It seems like we should probably also at least check if disk_format is RAW.
A kit if these issues will come back with disk driver domains I think.

OTOH, I don't seen an option for disk_format to be ceph; is it just
listed as "raw" as well?  That doesn't seem right...
That might well be the correct answer, but not for 4.3 I suspect?

I can't resolve this into an unambiguous meaning that makes sense. :-) Are you saying that ceph *should* be "raw" long-term, but that it shoudln't be for 4.3? Or that right now ceph *is* raw, but we should change it for 4.3? Or that we should change it long-term but leave it for 4.3?


Xen-devel mailing list



Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.