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

Re: [Xen-devel] [libvirt test] 55257: regressions - FAIL



On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 12:54:32PM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Fri, 2015-05-15 at 11:39 +0100, Anthony PERARD wrote:
> > On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 03:21:41PM -0600, Jim Fehlig wrote:
> > > More hint that libvirtd crashed.  Have there been any attempts to
> > > reproduce this outside of the test rig?  Or capture a core dump?
> > 
> > Here are two from the OpenStack CI loop:
> > http://logs.openstack.xenproject.org/10/181110/5/check/dsvm-tempest-xen/6005c68
> > http://logs.openstack.xenproject.org/21/183221/2/check/dsvm-tempest-xen/56324b0
> > 
> > in logs/libvirt/libxl/libxl-driver.txt.gz, you will find:
> > libxl: error: libxl_exec.c:396:spawn_timeout: domain 108 device model: 
> > startup timed out
> > libxl: error: libxl_dm.c:1388:device_model_spawn_outcome: domain 108 device 
> > model: spawn failed (rc=-3)
> > libxl: error: libxl_create.c:1186:domcreate_devmodel_started: device model 
> > did not start: -3
> > 
> > Weird, it's the same domain number for both logs :).
> > 
> > Other usefull logs from openstack can be found in logs/screen-n-cpu.txt.gz,
> > which is the service that talk to libvirtd.
> > 
> > It's running libvirt 1.2.14 with:
> >     f86ae40 libxl: Move job acquisition in libxlDomainStart to callers
> >     894d2ff libxl: acquire a job when destroying a domain
> >     6dfec1e libxl: drop virDomainObj lock when destroying a domain
> > and xen 4.4.1 with:
> >     9369988 libxl: event handling: Break out ao_work_outstanding
> >     f1335f0 libxl: event handling: ao_inprogress does waits while reports 
> > outstanding
> >     4783c99 libxl: In domain death search, start search at first domid we 
> > want
> >     188e9c5 libxl: Domain destroy: fork
> > http://wiki.xenproject.org/wiki/OpenStack_CI_Loop_for_Xen-Libvirt#Baseline
> 
> Interesting.
> 
> We didn't used to see these issues, but there has been a rather large
> gap where we didn't get useful results due to upheaval from the colo
> move and there were other issues (e.g. the crashing issue) which make it
> hard to pinpoint a point in time where this didn't happen.
> 
> Did you have a previous baseline which didn't exhibit these problems? Or
> did it exhibit enough other problems not to be usable?

This is the first baseline to be usefull with the CI loop, previous libvirt
release had other issues.
So in short, no.

-- 
Anthony PERARD

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


 


Rackspace

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