On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 8:05 PM, Nathan Grennan centos@cygnusx-1.org wrote:
I have a CentOS 5.1 dom0 running on a machine with two cores and 4gb of memory. It runs three 4.6 domUs and one 5.1 domU. Just out of the blue the other night all the 4.6 domUs crashed, but the dom0 stayed up. I ran xm console (domU-name) and got the Oops information below. I didn't get anything from the 5.1 domU. I think it had been rebooted a few days before and hadn't come up because of a initrd issue.
First 4.6 domU:
kernel BUG at arch/i386/mm/pgtable-xen.c:306!
...snip...
Hi, I'm moving this thread to the CentOS-virt mailinglist (please remove the centos mailinglist to everyone replying to this mail) since it is more suited for these kind of questions.
Question, If I read those crashes correctly your 4.6 domU is a 32 bit one ? What platform is your dom0 32 or 64 bit? Running a 32 bit domU on a 64 bit dom0 is currently not really stable. This is suppose to improve with 5.2
Regards, Tim
Tim Verhoeven wrote:
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 8:05 PM, Nathan Grennan centos@cygnusx-1.org wrote:
I have a CentOS 5.1 dom0 running on a machine with two cores and 4gb of memory. It runs three 4.6 domUs and one 5.1 domU. Just out of the blue the other night all the 4.6 domUs crashed, but the dom0 stayed up. I ran xm console (domU-name) and got the Oops information below. I didn't get anything from the 5.1 domU. I think it had been rebooted a few days before and hadn't come up because of a initrd issue.
First 4.6 domU:
kernel BUG at arch/i386/mm/pgtable-xen.c:306!
...snip...
Hi, I'm moving this thread to the CentOS-virt mailinglist (please remove the centos mailinglist to everyone replying to this mail) since it is more suited for these kind of questions.
Question, If I read those crashes correctly your 4.6 domU is a 32 bit one ? What platform is your dom0 32 or 64 bit? Running a 32 bit domU on a 64 bit dom0 is currently not really stable. This is suppose to improve with 5.2
I agree with Tim. I have just about the same setup as you at home, dual core, 4GB and I am running x86_64 with 32bit domUs and the only way I was able to get them to run reliably was using the Xen 3.2 from xen.org.
I hope 5.2 finally moves completely over to 3.2 with all it's features instead of this Frankenstein version it has where it glues the Xen 3.0.3 user land tools onto a highly patched 3.1 hypervisor forcing the user to try and use their swiss army knife libvirt to manage the mess. Ugh! I just want Xen and to manage it through Xen!
-Ross
______________________________________________________________________ This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by the addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete the original and any copy or printout thereof.
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 05:30:21PM -0400, Ross S. W. Walker wrote:
Tim Verhoeven wrote:
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 8:05 PM, Nathan Grennan centos@cygnusx-1.org wrote:
I have a CentOS 5.1 dom0 running on a machine with two cores and 4gb of memory. It runs three 4.6 domUs and one 5.1 domU. Just out of the blue the other night all the 4.6 domUs crashed, but the dom0 stayed up. I ran xm console (domU-name) and got the Oops information below. I didn't get anything from the 5.1 domU. I think it had been rebooted a few days before and hadn't come up because of a initrd issue.
First 4.6 domU:
kernel BUG at arch/i386/mm/pgtable-xen.c:306!
...snip...
Hi, I'm moving this thread to the CentOS-virt mailinglist (please remove the centos mailinglist to everyone replying to this mail) since it is more suited for these kind of questions.
Question, If I read those crashes correctly your 4.6 domU is a 32 bit one ? What platform is your dom0 32 or 64 bit? Running a 32 bit domU on a 64 bit dom0 is currently not really stable. This is suppose to improve with 5.2
I agree with Tim. I have just about the same setup as you at home, dual core, 4GB and I am running x86_64 with 32bit domUs and the only way I was able to get them to run reliably was using the Xen 3.2 from xen.org.
I hope 5.2 finally moves completely over to 3.2 with all it's features instead of this Frankenstein version it has where it glues the Xen 3.0.3 user land tools onto a highly patched 3.1 hypervisor forcing the user to try and use their swiss army knife libvirt to manage the mess. Ugh! I just want Xen and to manage it through Xen!
el 5.2 will be based on xen 3.1.2 _hypervisor_ at least that's what upstream says in the release notes..
https://www.redhat.com/archives/rhelv5-list/2008-March/msg00111.html
"+ Xen hypervisor rebase to 3.1.2"
package list / changes:
xen: 3.0.3-41.el5 -> 3.0.3-55.el5
So yeah.. :)
-- Pasi
Any idea how the upgrade from 5.1 to 5.2 affect current production boxes running stock Xen?
On Tue, 2008-03-18 at 13:54 +0200, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 05:30:21PM -0400, Ross S. W. Walker wrote:
Tim Verhoeven wrote:
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 8:05 PM, Nathan Grennan centos@cygnusx-1.org wrote:
I have a CentOS 5.1 dom0 running on a machine with two cores and 4gb of memory. It runs three 4.6 domUs and one 5.1 domU. Just out of the blue the other night all the 4.6 domUs crashed, but the dom0 stayed up. I ran xm console (domU-name) and got the Oops information below. I didn't get anything from the 5.1 domU. I think it had been rebooted a few days before and hadn't come up because of a initrd issue.
First 4.6 domU:
kernel BUG at arch/i386/mm/pgtable-xen.c:306!
...snip...
Hi, I'm moving this thread to the CentOS-virt mailinglist (please remove the centos mailinglist to everyone replying to this mail) since it is more suited for these kind of questions.
Question, If I read those crashes correctly your 4.6 domU is a 32 bit one ? What platform is your dom0 32 or 64 bit? Running a 32 bit domU on a 64 bit dom0 is currently not really stable. This is suppose to improve with 5.2
I agree with Tim. I have just about the same setup as you at home, dual core, 4GB and I am running x86_64 with 32bit domUs and the only way I was able to get them to run reliably was using the Xen 3.2 from xen.org.
I hope 5.2 finally moves completely over to 3.2 with all it's features instead of this Frankenstein version it has where it glues the Xen 3.0.3 user land tools onto a highly patched 3.1 hypervisor forcing the user to try and use their swiss army knife libvirt to manage the mess. Ugh! I just want Xen and to manage it through Xen!
el 5.2 will be based on xen 3.1.2 _hypervisor_ at least that's what upstream says in the release notes..
https://www.redhat.com/archives/rhelv5-list/2008-March/msg00111.html
"+ Xen hypervisor rebase to 3.1.2"
package list / changes:
xen: 3.0.3-41.el5 -> 3.0.3-55.el5
So yeah.. :)
-- Pasi _______________________________________________ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Roy Firestein wrote:
On Tue, 2008-03-18 at 13:54 +0200, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 05:30:21PM -0400, Ross S. W. Walker wrote:
Tim Verhoeven wrote:
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 8:05 PM, Nathan Grennan centos@cygnusx-1.org wrote:
I have a CentOS 5.1 dom0 running on a machine with two cores and 4gb of memory. It runs three 4.6 domUs and one 5.1 domU. Just out of the blue the other night all the 4.6 domUs crashed, but the dom0 stayed up. I ran xm console (domU-name) and got the Oops information below. I didn't get anything from the 5.1 domU. I think it had been rebooted a few days before and hadn't come up because of a initrd issue.
First 4.6 domU:
kernel BUG at arch/i386/mm/pgtable-xen.c:306!
...snip...
Hi, I'm moving this thread to the CentOS-virt mailinglist (please remove the centos mailinglist to everyone replying to this mail) since it is more suited for these kind of questions.
Question, If I read those crashes correctly your 4.6 domU is a 32 bit one ? What platform is your dom0 32 or 64 bit? Running a 32 bit domU on a 64 bit dom0 is currently not really stable. This is suppose to improve with 5.2
I agree with Tim. I have just about the same setup as you at home, dual core, 4GB and I am running x86_64 with 32bit domUs and the only way I was able to get them to run reliably was using the Xen 3.2 from xen.org.
I hope 5.2 finally moves completely over to 3.2 with all it's features instead of this Frankenstein version it has where it glues the Xen 3.0.3 user land tools onto a highly patched 3.1 hypervisor forcing the user to try and use their swiss army knife libvirt to manage the mess. Ugh! I just want Xen and to manage it through Xen!
el 5.2 will be based on xen 3.1.2 _hypervisor_ at least that's what upstream says in the release notes..
https://www.redhat.com/archives/rhelv5-list/2008-March/msg00111.html
"+ Xen hypervisor rebase to 3.1.2"
package list / changes:
xen: 3.0.3-41.el5 -> 3.0.3-55.el5
So yeah.. :)
Any idea how the upgrade from 5.1 to 5.2 affect current production boxes running stock Xen?
You still have a ways off, but when it does happen, given upstreams plan the new version of Xen will be a drop-in replacement that will not affect your Xen setup.
-Ross
______________________________________________________________________ This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by the addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete the original and any copy or printout thereof.
Ross S. W. Walker wrote:
glues the Xen 3.0.3 user land tools onto a highly patched 3.1 hypervisor forcing the user to try and use their swiss army knife libvirt to manage the mess. Ugh! I just want Xen and to manage it through Xen!
I quite like the virsh and virt-install stuff included in the distro, I think xen tools themselves are quite pedestrian at the moment. Perhaps their commercial offerings are better - for me, the libvirt and virsh make Xen a lot more usable
Tim Verhoeven wrote:
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 8:05 PM, Nathan Grennan centos@cygnusx-1.org wrote:
I have a CentOS 5.1 dom0 running on a machine with two cores and 4gb of memory. It runs three 4.6 domUs and one 5.1 domU. Just out of the blue the other night all the 4.6 domUs crashed, but the dom0 stayed up. I ran xm console (domU-name) and got the Oops information below. I didn't get anything from the 5.1 domU. I think it had been rebooted a few days before and hadn't come up because of a initrd issue.
First 4.6 domU:
kernel BUG at arch/i386/mm/pgtable-xen.c:306!
...snip...
Hi, I'm moving this thread to the CentOS-virt mailinglist (please remove the centos mailinglist to everyone replying to this mail) since it is more suited for these kind of questions.
Please don't thread hijack me offlist again. I had looked at posting it to CentOS-virt, but found the mailing list volume a magnitude less than CentOS. Because I decided to not post to CentOS-virt I also wasn't subscribed to it.
Question, If I read those crashes correctly your 4.6 domU is a 32 bit one ? What platform is your dom0 32 or 64 bit? Running a 32 bit domU on a 64 bit dom0 is currently not really stable. This is suppose to improve with 5.2
All are 32bit. I don't have CentOS 64bit anything.
Nathan Grennan wrote:
Tim Verhoeven wrote:
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 8:05 PM, Nathan Grennan centos@cygnusx-1.org wrote:
I have a CentOS 5.1 dom0 running on a machine with two cores and 4gb of memory. It runs three 4.6 domUs and one 5.1 domU. Just out of the blue the other night all the 4.6 domUs crashed, but the dom0 stayed up. I ran xm console (domU-name) and got the Oops information below. I didn't get anything from the 5.1 domU. I think it had been rebooted a few days before and hadn't come up because of a initrd issue.
First 4.6 domU:
kernel BUG at arch/i386/mm/pgtable-xen.c:306!
...snip...
Hi, I'm moving this thread to the CentOS-virt mailinglist (please remove the centos mailinglist to everyone replying to this mail) since it is more suited for these kind of questions.
Please don't thread hijack me offlist again. I had looked at posting it to CentOS-virt, but found the mailing list volume a magnitude less than CentOS. Because I decided to not post to CentOS-virt I also wasn't subscribed to it.
Question, If I read those crashes correctly your 4.6 domU is a 32 bit one ? What platform is your dom0 32 or 64 bit? Running a 32 bit domU on a 64 bit dom0 is currently not really stable. This is suppose to improve with 5.2
All are 32bit. I don't have CentOS 64bit anything.
Tim is a CentOS developer and in charge of our QA team .. he is not hijacking, he is redirecting to the proper list.
Johnny Hughes wrote:
Tim is a CentOS developer and in charge of our QA team .. he is not hijacking, he is redirecting to the proper list.
I still consider it a hijack even if he is "official". I would prefer that the mailing list not be treated like a website forum where there are moderators that play cop.
Far less eyes will see the thread on CentOS-virt, and there are plenty of other threads on CentOS that didn't get moved.
Nathan Grennan wrote:
Johnny Hughes wrote:
Tim is a CentOS developer and in charge of our QA team .. he is not hijacking, he is redirecting to the proper list.
I still consider it a hijack even if he is "official". I would prefer that the mailing list not be treated like a website forum where there are moderators that play cop.
Far less eyes will see the thread on CentOS-virt, and there are plenty of other threads on CentOS that didn't get moved.
If you're going to whine, at least use the right terminology:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thread_hijacking
-
Christopher G. Stach II -
Johnny Hughes -
Karanbir Singh -
Nathan Grennan -
Pasi Kärkkäinen -
Ross S. W. Walker -
Roy Firestein -
Tim Verhoeven