Dan Smith wrote:
DL This question comes up in other contexts than migration, too, for
DL example, when you want to start an image you just downloaded. I
DL think it would make sense if there was a common baseline in
DL libvirt that could tell you if a VM has any chance of running at
DL all -
Dan Smith wrote:
RJ Some issues around migration which are up for discussion:
Something else to consider is whether or not we undefine hosts
leaving one machine during a migration. Last time I checked, Xen left
a domain in powered-off state on the source. It seems to make more
sense to me for
Dan Smith wrote:
AL Processor revision is an artificial restriction. Just because
AL you're going from an AMD rev F to a rev 10 doesn't mean that your
AL application will stop working. In this particular case, it's
AL actually pretty unlikely that it would stop working.
What I really meant
Hi
I found some memory leaks in xml.c
-- Missing release of drvType and drvName in virDomainParseXMLDiskDesc().
This patch fixes it.
Signed-off-by: Masayuki Sunou [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thanks,
Masayuki Sunou.
Index:
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 05:19:27PM +0900, Masayuki Sunou wrote:
Hi
I found some memory leaks in xml.c
-- Missing release of drvType and drvName in virDomainParseXMLDiskDesc().
This patch fixes it.
Looks good, and the small refactoring makes the code cleaner :-)
Applied and commited
Masayuki Sunou wrote:
Hi
I found some memory leaks in xml.c
-- Missing release of drvType and drvName in virDomainParseXMLDiskDesc().
This patch fixes it.
Signed-off-by: Masayuki Sunou [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+1
Rich.
--
Emerging Technologies, Red Hat - http://et.redhat.com/~rjones/
Dan Smith wrote:
DL This question comes up in other contexts than migration, too, for
DL example, when you want to start an image you just downloaded. I
DL think it would make sense if there was a common baseline in
DL libvirt that could tell you if a VM has any chance of running at
DL all -
Till Maas wrote:
On Di Juli 10 2007, Daniel Veillard wrote:
Now is a good time to suggest new potential directions, and I certainly
forgot some obvious points, so what did I missed ?
What I am missing in open source virtualization solutions is the possibility
to make snapshots in a tree
Till Maas wrote:
On Di Juli 10 2007, Daniel Veillard wrote:
there is a 0.3.0-1.fc7 in Testing, could you check it out ?
With this version the last line number changed:
libvir: QEMU error test123: suspend operation failed
Traceback (most recent call last):
File
On Mi Juli 11 2007, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
I'm interested to know how VirtualBox / VMWare deal with disk storage.
Do they provide their own storage subsystems which support this or do
they interact with things like LVM?
The use their own subsystem. VMWare uses .vmdk files to store the
On Mi Juli 11 2007, Daniel Veillard wrote:
a bit too often to my taste and I would love something nicer, but at this
point we need better support at the hypervisor and integration with system
specific support. Not a piece of cake, and not something which can be
attacked just at the libvirt
That would be perfect ! Maybe we don't even need to hook in configure
I'm sure endianness info can come from standard headers, then combined
with a processor check that should be sufficient I guess.
Without introducing all the guest handle infrastructure and by just
fixing the known
Daniel Veillard wrote:
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 02:11:38PM +0200, Christian Ehrhardt wrote:
[...]
yes the only potential problem would be with other architectures where
__BIG_ENDIAN__ is defined and where the relative size of pointers and long
would be different.
We can change it to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I have implemented the 'domainSuspend' callback in
libvirt for my hypervisor (see test.c or qemu_internal.c for reference)
When using the Red Hat Virtual Manager (after connecting
to my hypervisor), clicking on a domain row,
then clicking the 'open' button at the
Till Maas wrote:
On Mi Juli 11 2007, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
I'm interested to know how VirtualBox / VMWare deal with disk storage.
Do they provide their own storage subsystems which support this or do
they interact with things like LVM?
The use their own subsystem. VMWare uses .vmdk files
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 08:59:08AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
Till Maas wrote:
On Mi Juli 11 2007, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
I'm interested to know how VirtualBox / VMWare deal with disk storage.
Do they provide their own storage subsystems which support this or do
they interact with
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 08:59:08AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
Till Maas wrote:
On Mi Juli 11 2007, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
I'm interested to know how VirtualBox / VMWare deal with disk storage.
Do they provide their own storage subsystems which
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 09:26:38AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 08:59:08AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
Till Maas wrote:
On Mi Juli 11 2007, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
I'm interested to know how VirtualBox / VMWare deal
AL The goal is to eliminate the distinction between savevm/migrate since
AL they are really the same thing (savevm just pauses the VM first).
But from a high level, there are (at least) two distinct management
operations in my mind: relocation and checkpointing. Relocation
implies that a guest
On Wed, 2007-07-11 at 15:48 +0200, Christian Ehrhardt wrote:
thanks a lot ! Does this fix all the libvirt proper platform issues
(i.e. independantly of possible xen specific ones) ?
Yes it fixes them as far as they are currently known to me.
As I wrote before I had already a
It is no longer used by the code.
Rich.
--
Emerging Technologies, Red Hat - http://et.redhat.com/~rjones/
Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod
Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SL4 1TE, United Kingdom. Registered in
England and Wales under Company Registration No.
This can prove useful if we want to track down problems like the
double-call of domainSuspend.
Also attached below is the output of virt-manager when this tracing is
enabled.
Note that if --enable-debug is not set, then no extra code is added to
libvirt.
Rich.
--
Emerging Technologies,
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 08:07:48AM -0700, Dan Smith wrote:
AL The goal is to eliminate the distinction between savevm/migrate since
AL they are really the same thing (savevm just pauses the VM first).
But from a high level, there are (at least) two distinct management
operations in my mind:
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 04:34:46PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
It is no longer used by the code.
Dohh ! +1 :-)
Daniel
--
Red Hat Virtualization group http://redhat.com/virtualization/
Daniel Veillard | virtualization library http://libvirt.org/
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | libxml GNOME
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 04:36:23PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
This can prove useful if we want to track down problems like the
double-call of domainSuspend.
Also attached below is the output of virt-manager when this tracing is
enabled.
Note that if --enable-debug is not set, then
DV you really want a pointer to an existing connection, not an URI
DV and hostname. Sure you could get the virConnectPtr based on the
DV URI, but it's better to rely on the user to do that step
DV independantly.
So that implies that in order to perform a migration with libvirt, the
user will need
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 12:02:26PM -0400, Daniel Veillard wrote:
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 04:36:23PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
This can prove useful if we want to track down problems like the
double-call of domainSuspend.
Also attached below is the output of virt-manager when this
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 05:06:31PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 12:02:26PM -0400, Daniel Veillard wrote:
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 04:36:23PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
This can prove useful if we want to track down problems like the
double-call of
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 09:05:11AM -0700, Dan Smith wrote:
DV you really want a pointer to an existing connection, not an URI
DV and hostname. Sure you could get the virConnectPtr based on the
DV URI, but it's better to rely on the user to do that step
DV independantly.
So that implies that
Daniel Veillard wrote:
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 05:06:31PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 12:02:26PM -0400, Daniel Veillard wrote:
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 04:36:23PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
This can prove useful if we want to track down problems like the
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 05:24:08PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
Daniel Veillard wrote:
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 05:06:31PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 12:02:26PM -0400, Daniel Veillard wrote:
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 04:36:23PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
Updated patch.
Rich.
--
Emerging Technologies, Red Hat - http://et.redhat.com/~rjones/
Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod
Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SL4 1TE, United Kingdom. Registered in
England and Wales under Company Registration No. 03798903
Index:
Daniel Veillard wrote:
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 08:07:48AM -0700, Dan Smith wrote:
AL The goal is to eliminate the distinction between savevm/migrate since
AL they are really the same thing (savevm just pauses the VM first).
But from a high level, there are (at least) two distinct management
Dan Smith wrote:
DV you really want a pointer to an existing connection, not an URI
DV and hostname. Sure you could get the virConnectPtr based on the
DV URI, but it's better to rely on the user to do that step
DV independantly.
So that implies that in order to perform a migration with libvirt,
AL It completely ignores issues like authentication and
AL authorization.
Excellent point. For that reason, a libvirt connection to the remote
makes sense to me.
AL virDomainSend(dom, url://);
Don't you not want a connection to the remote machine here?
virDomainSend(dom, rconn,
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 05:36:54PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
Updated patch.
Hum, apparently there is a misunderstanding
This fixes to use C99 syntax, but if you don't have C99 then
+#define DEBUG(fs,...)
and the various DEBUG statement would lead to an error I think.
Maybe I
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 11:57:28AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
Dan Smith wrote:
DV you really want a pointer to an existing connection, not an URI
DV and hostname. Sure you could get the virConnectPtr based on the
DV URI, but it's better to rely on the user to do that step
DV independantly.
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 08:46:00PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
There was a couple of places where if the ACL check for an incoming client
failed, it would go on and register the client's FD in the event loop
anyway. The trouble is, after the ACL failed, the client had been forcably
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 08:55:35PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
The QEMU driver is not passing in a virConnectPtr object for many of the
places it calls virRaiseError. This means the errors aren't getting fed
back to the client correctly - particularly when starting a VM / network.
This
If a remote client quits abnormally (or if the server forcably drops a
client for misbehaviing), it is possible that the virConnectPtr object
is not closed. This leads to a build up of active connections in the
server. The attached patch simply calls virConnectClose when killing off
a client
Hi
If specified device source does not exist,
Not appropriate error is displayed.
--
# virsh attach-disk PV_FC7_14 NOT_EXIST_PATH xvdd
libvir: Xen Daemon error : POST operation failed: (xend.err 'Device
51760 (vbd) could not be
41 matches
Mail list logo
