https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=466681 just to be sure that some one in xvm-team notices that before any bits from xvm-gate are putback ;) Florian
Am 28.06.2009 10:21, schrieb Florian Manschwetus:> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=466681 > > just to be sure that some one in xvm-team notices that before any bits > from xvm-gate are putback ;) > > FlorianAnd really bad, I have no idea howto use the mentioned workaround with xvm... florian
2009/6/28 Florian Manschwetus <florianmanschwetus@gmx.de>:> Am 28.06.2009 10:21, schrieb Florian Manschwetus: >> >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=466681 >> >> just to be sure that some one in xvm-team notices that before any bits >> from xvm-gate are putback ;) >> >> Florian > > And really bad, I have no idea howto use the mentioned workaround with > xvm...I think that Solaris xVM is not affected by this problem; unlike Linux, the Solaris dom0 disk driver device does not bypass the system cache.
Am 28.06.2009 11:55, schrieb Juergen Keil:> 2009/6/28 Florian Manschwetus<florianmanschwetus@gmx.de>: >> Am 28.06.2009 10:21, schrieb Florian Manschwetus: >>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=466681 >>> >>> just to be sure that some one in xvm-team notices that before any bits >>> from xvm-gate are putback ;) >>> >>> Florian >> And really bad, I have no idea howto use the mentioned workaround with >> xvm... > > > I think that Solaris xVM is not affected by this problem; unlike Linux, > the Solaris dom0 disk driver device does not bypass the system cache. >It is I have exactly this problem currently. We have updated the kernel of a DomU but the updated kernel isn''t loaded. Florian
2009/6/28 Florian Manschwetus <florianmanschwetus@gmx.de>:> Am 28.06.2009 11:55, schrieb Juergen Keil: >> >> 2009/6/28 Florian Manschwetus<florianmanschwetus@gmx.de>: >>> >>> Am 28.06.2009 10:21, schrieb Florian Manschwetus: >>>> >>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=466681 >>>> >>>> just to be sure that some one in xvm-team notices that before any bits >>>> from xvm-gate are putback ;) >>>> >>>> Florian >>> >>> And really bad, I have no idea howto use the mentioned workaround with >>> xvm... >> >> >> I think that Solaris xVM is not affected by this problem; unlike Linux, >> the Solaris dom0 disk driver device does not bypass the system cache. >> > It is I have exactly this problem currently. > We have updated the kernel of a DomU but the updated kernel isn''t loaded.dom0 is running Solaris ? What is running in domU ?
Am 28.06.2009 13:06, schrieb Juergen Keil:> 2009/6/28 Florian Manschwetus<florianmanschwetus@gmx.de>: >> Am 28.06.2009 11:55, schrieb Juergen Keil: >>> 2009/6/28 Florian Manschwetus<florianmanschwetus@gmx.de>: >>>> Am 28.06.2009 10:21, schrieb Florian Manschwetus: >>>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=466681 >>>>> >>>>> just to be sure that some one in xvm-team notices that before any bits >>>>> from xvm-gate are putback ;) >>>>> >>>>> Florian >>>> And really bad, I have no idea howto use the mentioned workaround with >>>> xvm... >>> >>> I think that Solaris xVM is not affected by this problem; unlike Linux, >>> the Solaris dom0 disk driver device does not bypass the system cache. >>> >> It is I have exactly this problem currently. >> We have updated the kernel of a DomU but the updated kernel isn''t loaded. > > dom0 is running Solaris ?Yes currently xvm-3.3 gate (I love zfs to be able to have 3 osols in one fs)> > What is running in domU ? >Opensolaris 2009.06 with slightly patched kernel (=> [sparks-discuss] AD support for nss_ldap (6834242) - webrev) Florian
2009/6/28 Florian Manschwetus <florianmanschwetus@gmx.de>:> Am 28.06.2009 13:06, schrieb Juergen Keil: >> >> 2009/6/28 Florian Manschwetus<florianmanschwetus@gmx.de>: >>> >>> Am 28.06.2009 11:55, schrieb Juergen Keil: >>>> >>>> 2009/6/28 Florian Manschwetus<florianmanschwetus@gmx.de>: >>>>> >>>>> Am 28.06.2009 10:21, schrieb Florian Manschwetus: >>>>>> >>>>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=466681 >>>>>> >>>>>> just to be sure that some one in xvm-team notices that before any bits >>>>>> from xvm-gate are putback ;) >>>>>> >>>>>> Florian >>>>> >>>>> And really bad, I have no idea howto use the mentioned workaround with >>>>> xvm... >>>> >>>> I think that Solaris xVM is not affected by this problem; unlike Linux, >>>> the Solaris dom0 disk driver device does not bypass the system cache. >>>> >>> It is I have exactly this problem currently. >>> We have updated the kernel of a DomU but the updated kernel isn''t loaded. >> >> dom0 is running Solaris ? > > Yes currently xvm-3.3 gate (I love zfs to be able to have 3 osols in one fs) >> >> What is running in domU ? >> > Opensolaris 2009.06 with slightly patched kernel > (=> [sparks-discuss] AD support for nss_ldap (6834242) - webrev)Hmm, so the domU is using zfs root. Did you create a new snapshot / boot environment for the new kernel? Does the python config file for the domU force booting from a certain zfs filesystem? Is the domU zpool''s bootfs property pointing to the correct zfs boot filesystem?
Am 28.06.2009 18:37, schrieb Juergen Keil:> 2009/6/28 Florian Manschwetus<florianmanschwetus@gmx.de>: >> Am 28.06.2009 13:06, schrieb Juergen Keil: >>> 2009/6/28 Florian Manschwetus<florianmanschwetus@gmx.de>: >>>> Am 28.06.2009 11:55, schrieb Juergen Keil: >>>>> 2009/6/28 Florian Manschwetus<florianmanschwetus@gmx.de>: >>>>>> Am 28.06.2009 10:21, schrieb Florian Manschwetus: >>>>>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=466681 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> just to be sure that some one in xvm-team notices that before any bits >>>>>>> from xvm-gate are putback ;) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Florian >>>>>> And really bad, I have no idea howto use the mentioned workaround with >>>>>> xvm... >>>>> I think that Solaris xVM is not affected by this problem; unlike Linux, >>>>> the Solaris dom0 disk driver device does not bypass the system cache. >>>>> >>>> It is I have exactly this problem currently. >>>> We have updated the kernel of a DomU but the updated kernel isn''t loaded. >>> dom0 is running Solaris ? >> Yes currently xvm-3.3 gate (I love zfs to be able to have 3 osols in one fs) >>> What is running in domU ? >>> >> Opensolaris 2009.06 with slightly patched kernel >> (=> [sparks-discuss] AD support for nss_ldap (6834242) - webrev) > > Hmm, so the domU is using zfs root. > > Did you create a new snapshot / boot environment for the new kernel? > Does the python config file for the domU force booting from a certain > zfs filesystem? Is the domU zpool''s bootfs property pointing to the > correct zfs boot filesystem? >That was it, the grub config is ignored so we have had to manually point to the new kernel. Thx
Florian Manschwetus wrote:> Am 28.06.2009 18:37, schrieb Juergen Keil: >> Did you create a new snapshot / boot environment for the new kernel? >> Does the python config file for the domU force booting from a certain >> zfs filesystem? Is the domU zpool''s bootfs property pointing to the >> correct zfs boot filesystem? >> > That was it, the grub config is ignored so we have had to manually point > to the new kernel.Can you explain what you did which didn''t work? e.g. what it a beadm create, beadm activate? Or something esle? Thanks, MRJ
Am 29.06.2009 13:53, schrieb Mark Johnson:> > > Florian Manschwetus wrote: >> Am 28.06.2009 18:37, schrieb Juergen Keil: >>> Did you create a new snapshot / boot environment for the new kernel? >>> Does the python config file for the domU force booting from a certain >>> zfs filesystem? Is the domU zpool''s bootfs property pointing to the >>> correct zfs boot filesystem? >>> >> That was it, the grub config is ignored so we have had to manually >> point to the new kernel. > > Can you explain what you did which didn''t work? > > > e.g. what it a beadm create, beadm activate? Or something esle?We have clarified this, it isn''t this issue it is just the fact that the pygrub for zfs is no grub (it ignores the grub-config and loads a default named kernel from guests filesystem), so we have to tell him what kernel to get, now it works. Florian
Florian Manschwetus wrote:> Am 29.06.2009 13:53, schrieb Mark Johnson: >> >> >> Florian Manschwetus wrote: >>> Am 28.06.2009 18:37, schrieb Juergen Keil: >>>> Did you create a new snapshot / boot environment for the new kernel? >>>> Does the python config file for the domU force booting from a certain >>>> zfs filesystem? Is the domU zpool''s bootfs property pointing to the >>>> correct zfs boot filesystem? >>>> >>> That was it, the grub config is ignored so we have had to manually >>> point to the new kernel. >> >> Can you explain what you did which didn''t work? >> >> >> e.g. what it a beadm create, beadm activate? Or something esle? > > We have clarified this, it isn''t this issue it is just the fact that the > pygrub for zfs is no grubYeah, we need to port pvgrub one of these days.. MRJ> (it ignores the grub-config and loads a > default named kernel from guests filesystem), so we have to tell him > what kernel to get, now it works. > > Florian >