From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Pang, LongtaoX" Subject: Re: [OSSTEST Nested PATCH v11 5/7] Add new script to customize nested test configuration Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2015 03:46:04 +0000 Message-ID: <86C3224E41A7434B904EC364302132D80E4C0A4F@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> References: <1432631304-27347-1-git-send-email-longtaox.pang@intel.com> <1432631304-27347-6-git-send-email-longtaox.pang@intel.com> <21880.17044.20906.699699@mariner.uk.xensource.com> <86C3224E41A7434B904EC364302132D80E4BFE0F@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> <21881.42457.285212.187919@mariner.uk.xensource.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <21881.42457.285212.187919@mariner.uk.xensource.com> Content-Language: en-US List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Ian Jackson Cc: "Hu, Robert" , "wei.liu2@citrix.com" , "Ian.Campbell@citrix.com" , "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org > -----Original Message----- > From: Ian Jackson [mailto:Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com] > Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 11:15 PM > To: Pang, LongtaoX > Cc: xen-devel@lists.xen.org; Ian.Campbell@citrix.com; wei.liu2@citrix.com; Hu, > Robert > Subject: RE: [OSSTEST Nested PATCH v11 5/7] Add new script to customize nested > test configuration > > Pang, LongtaoX writes ("RE: [OSSTEST Nested PATCH v11 5/7] Add new script to > customize nested test configuration"): > > [Ian Jackson [mailto:Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com]] > > > > We would avoid having to mention /dev/xvdb if we created the VG in the > > > host, before doing block-attach. I'm not sure whether that's an > > > improvement. > > > > I am sorry, I cannot get your point. Could you please make it more > > clear? Thanks. > > As you explain in the comment, you have to mention /dev/xvdb here even > though after rebooting into Xen this will be /dev/sdb. > > This wrinkle would become invisible if you did pvcreate and vgcreate > in the L0 (before attach), rather than the L1 (after attach). > Because, then none of your operations on L1 would not need to name the > physical device. > Thanks for your explanation. For nested job, we will install L2 guest inside L1 reuse 'ts-debian-hvm-install' script. But according to recent code design, inside L1 HVM guest, there is no vg group, so that we need to create a vg group for L2 installation. So, inside L0, we create storage lv(lvcreate -L ${guest_storage_lv_size}M -n $guest_storage_lv_name $vgname), attach this lv to L1. Then inside L1, using the attached disk to create a pv(pvcreate /dev/xvdb), then create a vg(vgcreate ${l1_gn}-disk /dev/xvdb) base on the pv. Then, using this vg for installing L2. I think '/dev/xvdb' is necessary when create vg inside L1, using command 'vgcreate ${l1_gn}-disk /dev/xvdb' . Please correct me if I am wrong. > Ian.