similar to: xen4centos kernel version / debuginfo

On Mon, 17 Jul 2017, Johnny Hughes wrote: > Are the testing kernels (kernel-4.9.37-29.el7 and kernel-4.9.37-29.el6, > with the one config file change) working for everyone: > > (turn off: CONFIG_IO_STRICT_DEVMEM) Hello. Maybe it's not the most appropriate thread or time, but I have been signalling it before: 4.9.* kernels do not work well for me any more (and for other people

On 06/12/2017 05:17 PM, Sarah Newman wrote: > Is there any problem moving to 4.9.31? This contains upstream commits f2e767bb5d6ee0d9 for mpt3sas and > 69861e0a52f87333 for dom0 memory mappings. 4.9.31-27 is tagged for testing presently along with updated firmware. I have it running on one hypervisor on Xen-44 and it has been stable for 3 days so far. We could probably use some more testing

where is the source code of xen_blkback.ko xen_netback.ko? thanks _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

Package: xen-hypervisor-4.4-amd64 Version: 4.4.1-9 Severity: critical Justification: breaks the whole system Dear Maintainer, After upgrading the R610 server from Debian 7 to Debian 8, the dom0 becomes unresponsive via ssh after an hour or so, although the domUs still remain accessible. Initially we thought it may be a disk space issue on / or /boot so action was taken to increase those

Xen 4.6.3-15 packages for CentOS 6 and CentOS 7 are on their way through the build system. They should show up in centos-virt-testing in a few hours, and in the main mirrors tomorrow morning (God willing). These contain several critical updates; users are encouraged to update as soon as possible. XSA 220 unfortunately had several dependencies on changes included in 4.6.4 and 4.6.5. This

Hi, that kernel fix will be released on 6.x repo also ? I see it only on 7.x repo kernel-4.9.31-27.el7.x86_64.rpm thanks On 20/06/2017 20:15, Sarah Newman wrote: > On 06/20/2017 05:06 AM, George Dunlap wrote: >> Xen 4.6.3-15 packages for CentOS 6 and CentOS 7 are on their way >> through the build system. They should show up in centos-virt-testing >> in a few hours, and

On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 10:38 PM, Nathan March <nathan at gt.net> wrote: > Just a heads up that I'm seeing major stability problems on these builds. > Didn't have console capture setup unfortunately, but have seen my test > hypervisor hard lock twice over the weekend. > > This is with xpti being used, rather than the shim. Thanks for the heads-up. It's been

After an S3 host resume, I''m seeing: [48002.772629] ACPI: Low-level resume complete [48002.772802] PM: Restoring platform NVS memory [48002.776143] xen_acpi_processor: Uploading Xen processor PM info [48002.776691] ------------[ cut here ]------------ [48002.776712] WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 10235 at drivers/base/syscore.c:104 syscore_resume+0x9a/0xe0() [48002.776751] Interrupts enabled after

Hi. I am using xen 4.2.2, the system runs okay. But when I suspend it, it does so, but crashes on trying to resume. Here is lsmod output: Module Size Used by xen_pciback 52011 0 xen_netback 27468 0 xen_blkback 26998 0 xen_gntalloc 13144 0 xen_gntdev 17403 1 xen_evtchn 13132 1 xenfs 12985 1 xen_privcmd 13177 5 xenfs parport_pc 28152 0 ppdev 17073 0 rfcomm 42641 12 bnep 18036 2 ext2 72837 1

Hi. I am using xen 4.2.2, the system runs okay. But when I suspend it, it does so, but crashes on trying to resume. Here is lsmod output: Module Size Used by xen_pciback 52011 0 xen_netback 27468 0 xen_blkback 26998 0 xen_gntalloc 13144 0 xen_gntdev 17403 1 xen_evtchn 13132 1 xenfs 12985 1 xen_privcmd 13177 5 xenfs parport_pc 28152 0 ppdev 17073 0 rfcomm 42641 12 bnep 18036 2 ext2 72837 1

Hello, I''m facing a rather strange problem with the netback interface. My setup involves a netvm, which has some physical network interfaces assigned, and a client VM where a net front is running (exposed as eth0) and which is connected to that netvm (via vif42.0 interface, as seen in the netvm on the dumps below). Now, the netvm has two physical network interfaces assigned: 1) A

Since moving from 4.4 to 4.6, I've been seeing an increasing number of stability issues on our hypervisors. I'm not clear if there's a singular root cause here, or if I'm dealing with multiple bugs. One of the more common ones I've seen, is a VM on shutdown will remain in the null state and a kernel bug is thrown: xen001 log # xl list Name

Howdy, I hit a snag trying to install Xen4CentOS on a Supermicro based system (X9DRD-7LN4F with the Broadcom/LSI 2308 chipset). I spent a few hours on this today, I'm posting this here in case it helps anyone else and saves them the frustration I dealt with. On this system I did a fresh install of CentOS 7, updated it, rebooted it, then installed Xen. The system was booting fine using the

Hi Wei, I ran into the following problem when trying to boot another guest after less than a day of uptime. (the system started 15 guests at boot already which went fine). dom0 is allocated a fixed 1536M. Both host as pv guests run the same kernel, some hvm''s run a slightly older kernel (3.9 f.e.) The are quite some granttable messages in xl dmesg, i also included these and a

Hi Michael: Sorry to brother. But I''ve been suffered this issue quite a long time. My test environment is 2.6.32.36 + xen 4.0.1 + bnx2, 2.3. Also cpu idle is disabled in grub. Grub info: title Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server (2.6.32.36xen) kernel /xen-4.0.1.gz iommu=off x2apic=off console=com1,vga com1=115200,8n1 noreboot cpuidle=0 cpufreq=none

Are the testing kernels (kernel-4.9.37-29.el7 and kernel-4.9.37-29.el6, with the one config file change) working for everyone: (turn off: CONFIG_IO_STRICT_DEVMEM) If we don't hear any negative comments by Wednesday July 19th, 2017 then we are going to push those to updates as they solve iscsi issues with some hardware and don't seem to impact anything else based on limited testing. BTW

Hello we see the same with debian Wheezy. Apr 16 16:02:25 hypervisor3 kernel: [2441115.664216] vif vif-17-0: vif17.0: Frag is bigger than frame. Apr 16 16:02:25 hypervisor3 kernel: [2441115.664267] vif vif-17-0: vif17.0: fatal error; disabling device Apr 16 16:02:25 hypervisor3 kernel: [2441115.675667] BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at 00000000000008b8 Apr 16 16:02:25

On Wed, 19 Jul 2017, Johnny Hughes wrote: > On 07/19/2017 09:23 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote: >> On 07/19/2017 04:27 AM, Piotr Gackiewicz wrote: >>> On Mon, 17 Jul 2017, Johnny Hughes wrote: >>> >>>> Are the testing kernels (kernel-4.9.37-29.el7 and kernel-4.9.37-29.el6, >>>> with the one config file change) working for everyone: >>>>

On 14-09-2017 20:57, Adi Pircalabu wrote: > On 08-09-2017 6:17, Kevin Stange wrote: >> On 09/06/2017 05:21 PM, Kevin Stange wrote: >>> On 09/06/2017 08:40 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote: >>>> On 09/05/2017 02:26 PM, Kevin Stange wrote: >>>>> On 09/04/2017 05:27 PM, Johnny Hughes wrote: >>>>>> On 09/04/2017 03:59 PM, Kevin Stange wrote:

On 07/19/2017 04:27 AM, Piotr Gackiewicz wrote: > On Mon, 17 Jul 2017, Johnny Hughes wrote: > >> Are the testing kernels (kernel-4.9.37-29.el7 and kernel-4.9.37-29.el6, >> with the one config file change) working for everyone: >> >> (turn off: CONFIG_IO_STRICT_DEVMEM) > > Hello. > Maybe it's not the most appropriate thread or time, but I have been >