* Re: [Xen-changelog] Fix VCPU locking in sched_adjdom for multi-VCPU guests
[not found] <E1F40Cd-00042S-PI@xenbits.xensource.com>
@ 2006-01-31 20:30 ` Matt Ayres
2006-01-31 22:35 ` Keir Fraser
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Matt Ayres @ 2006-01-31 20:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: xen-devel
Does this commit in way way affect bug id # 502?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: Re: [Xen-changelog] Fix VCPU locking in sched_adjdom for multi-VCPU guests
2006-01-31 20:30 ` [Xen-changelog] Fix VCPU locking in sched_adjdom for multi-VCPU guests Matt Ayres
@ 2006-01-31 22:35 ` Keir Fraser
2006-01-31 22:42 ` Matt Ayres
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Keir Fraser @ 2006-01-31 22:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Matt Ayres; +Cc: xen-devel
No chance. But noone will be able to tell what BUG you are talking
about, since you provide many attachments but no output from the BUGing
kernel.
-- Keir
On 31 Jan 2006, at 20:30, Matt Ayres wrote:
> Does this commit in way way affect bug id # 502?
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: Re: [Xen-changelog] Fix VCPU locking in sched_adjdom for multi-VCPU guests
2006-01-31 22:35 ` Keir Fraser
@ 2006-01-31 22:42 ` Matt Ayres
2006-01-31 23:57 ` Keir Fraser
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Matt Ayres @ 2006-01-31 22:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Keir Fraser; +Cc: xen-devel
<puts on dunce hat>
I've created a comment with the BUG. I remember I was going to have
xen-bugtool include /var/log/messages, but later decided I didn't want
so many system details put out in public.
Thank you,
Matt Ayres
Keir Fraser wrote:
>
> No chance. But noone will be able to tell what BUG you are talking
> about, since you provide many attachments but no output from the BUGing
> kernel.
>
> -- Keir
>
> On 31 Jan 2006, at 20:30, Matt Ayres wrote:
>
>> Does this commit in way way affect bug id # 502?
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Xen-devel mailing list
>> Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
>> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: Re: [Xen-changelog] Fix VCPU locking in sched_adjdom for multi-VCPU guests
2006-01-31 22:42 ` Matt Ayres
@ 2006-01-31 23:57 ` Keir Fraser
2006-02-01 16:08 ` Linux 2.6 guest BUG(). (was: Re: Re: [Xen-changelog] Fix VCPU locking in sched_adjdom for multi-VCPU guests) Matt Ayres
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Keir Fraser @ 2006-01-31 23:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Matt Ayres; +Cc: xen-devel
On 31 Jan 2006, at 22:42, Matt Ayres wrote:
> <puts on dunce hat>
>
> I've created a comment with the BUG. I remember I was going to have
> xen-bugtool include /var/log/messages, but later decided I didn't want
> so many system details put out in public.
How tight on memory are you running the system? The BUG is probably
happening because the guest is failing to allocate a page of memory
below 4GB. Since Xen tries to give out memory below 4GB last, that
probably means there is very little available memory.
Obviously we need a better fallback strategy than BUG(). :-)
-- Keir
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: Linux 2.6 guest BUG(). (was: Re: Re: [Xen-changelog] Fix VCPU locking in sched_adjdom for multi-VCPU guests)
2006-01-31 23:57 ` Keir Fraser
@ 2006-02-01 16:08 ` Matt Ayres
2006-02-01 16:27 ` Keir Fraser
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Matt Ayres @ 2006-02-01 16:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Keir Fraser; +Cc: xen-devel
Keir Fraser wrote:
>
> On 31 Jan 2006, at 22:42, Matt Ayres wrote:
>
>> <puts on dunce hat>
>>
>> I've created a comment with the BUG. I remember I was going to have
>> xen-bugtool include /var/log/messages, but later decided I didn't want
>> so many system details put out in public.
>
> How tight on memory are you running the system? The BUG is probably
> happening because the guest is failing to allocate a page of memory
> below 4GB. Since Xen tries to give out memory below 4GB last, that
> probably means there is very little available memory.
>
I can provide dozens of BUG()'s if required. It just happened again on
a host in dom0 to the sshd daemon and now that port is locked (netstat
-nlp reports "-" as the process name). I am able to access the server
via the console.
I assume you mean Xen's memory usage. I am showing 141MB free out of
8112MB total. Our scripts to add accounts don't allow adding more
accounts then there is memory for, we actually leave about 128MB as a
buffer.
> Obviously we need a better fallback strategy than BUG(). :-)
>
Alright captain, what do I need to do on my end? Grepping
/var/log/messages for "syscall" grants about 20+ results so something is
going very wrong.
Thank you,
Matt Ayres
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: Linux 2.6 guest BUG(). (was: Re: Re: [Xen-changelog] Fix VCPU locking in sched_adjdom for multi-VCPU guests)
2006-02-01 16:08 ` Linux 2.6 guest BUG(). (was: Re: Re: [Xen-changelog] Fix VCPU locking in sched_adjdom for multi-VCPU guests) Matt Ayres
@ 2006-02-01 16:27 ` Keir Fraser
2006-02-01 16:34 ` Linux 2.6 guest BUG() Matt Ayres
2006-02-01 19:07 ` Matt Ayres
0 siblings, 2 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Keir Fraser @ 2006-02-01 16:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Matt Ayres; +Cc: xen-devel
On 1 Feb 2006, at 16:08, Matt Ayres wrote:
> I can provide dozens of BUG()'s if required. It just happened again
> on a host in dom0 to the sshd daemon and now that port is locked
> (netstat -nlp reports "-" as the process name). I am able to access
> the server via the console.
>
> I assume you mean Xen's memory usage. I am showing 141MB free out of
> 8112MB total. Our scripts to add accounts don't allow adding more
> accounts then there is memory for, we actually leave about 128MB as a
> buffer.
That's a bit odd then. If you don't explicitly specify dom0's memory
allocation at boot time then you should end up with 128MB 'slack' left
unallocated. And that should all be <4GB.
If you are giving dom0 all of memory on boot, and then reducing it
later, that could be a problem (dom0 may end up giving back only memory
>4GB).
-- Keir
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: Linux 2.6 guest BUG().
2006-02-01 16:27 ` Keir Fraser
@ 2006-02-01 16:34 ` Matt Ayres
2006-02-01 19:07 ` Matt Ayres
1 sibling, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Matt Ayres @ 2006-02-01 16:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Keir Fraser; +Cc: xen-devel
Keir Fraser wrote:
>
> On 1 Feb 2006, at 16:08, Matt Ayres wrote:
>
>>
>> I assume you mean Xen's memory usage. I am showing 141MB free out of
>> 8112MB total. Our scripts to add accounts don't allow adding more
>> accounts then there is memory for, we actually leave about 128MB as a
>> buffer.
>
> That's a bit odd then. If you don't explicitly specify dom0's memory
> allocation at boot time then you should end up with 128MB 'slack' left
> unallocated. And that should all be <4GB.
>
> If you are giving dom0 all of memory on boot, and then reducing it
> later, that could be a problem (dom0 may end up giving back only memory
> >4GB).
I am allocating 256MB of RAM to dom0. I am running Fedora Core 4. On
this particular server I am running httpd/mysqld on the host with a fair
amount of activity to it, but I have extended swap space to 1GB and
tuned both apps for low memory usage. The memory is set statically via
kernel line in grub. (dom0-min-mem 262144) is set in xend-config.sxp to
ensure it keeps the memory allocated to it.
Thank you,
Matt Ayres
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: Linux 2.6 guest BUG().
2006-02-01 16:27 ` Keir Fraser
2006-02-01 16:34 ` Linux 2.6 guest BUG() Matt Ayres
@ 2006-02-01 19:07 ` Matt Ayres
1 sibling, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Matt Ayres @ 2006-02-01 19:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Keir Fraser; +Cc: xen-devel
Keir Fraser wrote:
>
> On 1 Feb 2006, at 16:08, Matt Ayres wrote:
>
>> I can provide dozens of BUG()'s if required. It just happened again
>> on a host in dom0 to the sshd daemon and now that port is locked
>> (netstat -nlp reports "-" as the process name). I am able to access
>> the server via the console.
>>
>> I assume you mean Xen's memory usage. I am showing 141MB free out of
>> 8112MB total. Our scripts to add accounts don't allow adding more
>> accounts then there is memory for, we actually leave about 128MB as a
>> buffer.
>
> That's a bit odd then. If you don't explicitly specify dom0's memory
> allocation at boot time then you should end up with 128MB 'slack' left
> unallocated. And that should all be <4GB.
>
> If you are giving dom0 all of memory on boot, and then reducing it
> later, that could be a problem (dom0 may end up giving back only memory
> >4GB).
>
Just as an update, I just "upgraded" this specific host from -unstable
to 3.0-testing (3.0.1) and I will report back if I still receive these
BUG()'s.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2006-02-01 19:07 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <E1F40Cd-00042S-PI@xenbits.xensource.com>
2006-01-31 20:30 ` [Xen-changelog] Fix VCPU locking in sched_adjdom for multi-VCPU guests Matt Ayres
2006-01-31 22:35 ` Keir Fraser
2006-01-31 22:42 ` Matt Ayres
2006-01-31 23:57 ` Keir Fraser
2006-02-01 16:08 ` Linux 2.6 guest BUG(). (was: Re: Re: [Xen-changelog] Fix VCPU locking in sched_adjdom for multi-VCPU guests) Matt Ayres
2006-02-01 16:27 ` Keir Fraser
2006-02-01 16:34 ` Linux 2.6 guest BUG() Matt Ayres
2006-02-01 19:07 ` Matt Ayres
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.