Stefano Stabellini
2009-Oct-05 13:40 UTC
[Xen-devel] [PATCH 0 of 12] backport critical fixes from qemu upstream
Hi all, the current qemu block layer contains few critical problems, one of them was fixed by "fix qemu memory leak in block interface" but unfortunately others remain. In particular every time the guest cancels a dma request qemu segfaults. In order to completely fix any remaining bug I suggest to revert the previous fix "fix qemu memory leak in block interface" and backport instead the following changesets from qemu upstream: 6bbff9a0b495918309074ac60375be5f9dc868b3 # Refactor aio callback allocation to use an aiocb pool (Avi Kivity) c07a9008ac6985cd5a15909c2b9977d982defc12 # Convert vectored aio emulation to use a dedicated pool (Avi Kivity) 6512a2a7106480c19183d6466a6845bc9bdf6ec0 # Implement cancellation method for dma async I/O (Avi Kivity) 3fb94d56c6adc96ffc4a81b58c752cc4ccfae39c # Use vectored aiocb storage to store vector translation state (Avi Kivity) 37b7842c2fb405c270efdce714425c17af3c78cd # Move block dma helpers aiocb to store dma state (Avi Kivity) c240b9af599d20e06a58090366be682684bd8555 # Fix vectored aio bounce handling immediate errors (Avi Kivity) 7403b14eeb4670d54497284b110ca3e3be4a99a4 # Fix DMA API when handling an immediate error from block layer (Avi Kivity) 081501daceca74d2091e798d5dcd342c14d66d1a # check for bs->drv in bdrv_flush (Christoph Hellwig) fbb7b4e0804d2168f24142eebf7552adde1968dc # Improve block range checks 6a7ad2998ca47711eddd191caa1a95f14459793f # Call qemu_bh_delete at bdrv_aio_bh_cb. 36afc451599175eb8f03f1962de74e7f7a8af4db # block: Clean up after deleting BHs The same should be done to qemu-xen-3.4-testing as well. Cheers, Stefano _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
Mark Johnson
2009-Oct-09 12:04 UTC
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0 of 12] backport critical fixes from qemu upstream
Ian, On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 9:40 AM, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com> wrote:> Hi all, > the current qemu block layer contains few critical problems, one of them > was fixed by "fix qemu memory leak in block interface" but unfortunately > others remain. > In particular every time the guest cancels a dma request qemu > segfaults. > In order to completely fix any remaining bug I suggest to revert the > previous fix "fix qemu memory leak in block interface" and backport > instead the following changesets from qemu upstream:> The same should be done to qemu-xen-3.4-testing as well. > Cheers,Are you planning to push these to qemu-xen-3.4-testing soon too? Thanks, MRJ _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
Ian Jackson
2009-Oct-09 13:58 UTC
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0 of 12] backport critical fixes from qemu upstream
Mark Johnson writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0 of 12] backport critical
fixes from qemu upstream"):> On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 9:40 AM, Stefano Stabellini
> <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
> > The same should be done to qemu-xen-3.4-testing as well.
> > Cheers,
>
> Are you planning to push these to qemu-xen-3.4-testing soon too?
Yes, but I''m giving it a few days to settle down in qemu-xen-unstable
first, as that seemed sensible ...
Ian.
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
Florian Manschwetus
2009-Oct-11 09:04 UTC
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0 of 12] backport critical fixes from qemu upstream
Am 09.10.2009 15:58, schrieb Ian Jackson:> Mark Johnson writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0 of 12] backport critical fixes from qemu upstream"): >> On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 9:40 AM, Stefano Stabellini >> <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com> wrote: >>> The same should be done to qemu-xen-3.4-testing as well. >>> Cheers, >> >> Are you planning to push these to qemu-xen-3.4-testing soon too? > > Yes, but I''m giving it a few days to settle down in qemu-xen-unstable > first, as that seemed sensible ... > > Ian.Ok, but how much are a few days? This, 2106 xvm 3 59 0 5700M 3743M sleep 758:48 0.28% qemu-dm is quite a real showstopper and a big pain in my... So, sorry but this fix is really a critical one. Florian> > _______________________________________________ > Xen-devel mailing list > Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel >_______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
Mark Johnson
2009-Oct-14 19:49 UTC
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0 of 12] backport critical fixes from qemu upstream
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 9:58 AM, Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com> wrote:> Mark Johnson writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0 of 12] backport critical fixes from qemu upstream"): >> On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 9:40 AM, Stefano Stabellini >> <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com> wrote: >> > The same should be done to qemu-xen-3.4-testing as well. >> > Cheers, >> >> Are you planning to push these to qemu-xen-3.4-testing soon too? > > Yes, but I''m giving it a few days to settle down in qemu-xen-unstable > first, as that seemed sensible ...FYI, I''ve pull these changes into 3.4 and qemu-dm is still leaking a ton of memory for HVM guests which do not have PV drivers.. qemu-dm does not appear to leak memory for a HVM guest with PV net & disk drivers. MRJ _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel