Re: [libvirt] xend_internal: Use domain/status for shutdown check

On 10.04.2012 15:22, Cole Robinson wrote: > On 04/10/2012 04:46 AM, Stefan Bader wrote: >> On 04/08/2012 03:08 PM, Cole Robinson wrote: >>> On 04/02/2012 10:38 AM, Stefan Bader wrote: >>>> xend_internal: Use domain/status for shutdown check >>>> >>>> On newer xend (v3.x and after) there is no state and domid reported >>>> for inactive domains. When initially creating connections this is >>>> handled in various places by assigning domain->id = -1. >>>> But once an instance has been running, the id is set to the current >>>> domain id. And it does not change when the instance is shut down. >>>> So when querying the domain info, the hypervisor driver, which gets >>>> asked first will indicate it cannot find information, then the >>>> xend driver is asked and will set the status to NOSTATE because it >>>> checks for the -1 domain id. >>>> Checking domain/status for 0 seems to be more reliable for that. >>>> >>>> One note: I am not sure whether the domain->id also should get set >>>> back to -1 whenever any sub-driver thinks the instance is no longer >>>> running. >>>> >>>> BugLink: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=746007 >>>> BugLink: http://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/929626 >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Stefan Bader <stefan.bader(a)canonical.com&gt; >>>> >>>> Index: libvirt-0.9.8/src/xen/xend_internal.c >>>> =================================================================== >>>> --- libvirt-0.9.8.orig/src/xen/xend_internal.c 2011-12-04 08:15:00.000000000 +0100 >>>> +++ libvirt-0.9.8/src/xen/xend_internal.c 2012-03-23 11:07:43.575529377 +0100 >>>> @@ -989,9 +989,11 @@ >>>> state = VIR_DOMAIN_BLOCKED; >>>> else if (strchr(flags, 'r')) >>>> state = VIR_DOMAIN_RUNNING; >>>> - } else if (domain->id < 0) { >>>> - /* Inactive domains don't have a state reported, so >>>> - mark them SHUTOFF, rather than NOSTATE */ >>>> + } else if (sexpr_int(root, "domain/status") == 0) { >>> >>> Maybe this should be >>> >>> (domain->id < 0 || sexpr_int(root, ... >>> >> It would not matter. Since the status is zero for all non-running domains it >> covers those with domain->id < 0 as well. >> > > Even for RHEL5 vintage xen? Since we historically try to maintain > compatibility with that. It may well work, but unless it's tested I don't > think there's much harm in keeping the id < 0 check to preserve old behavior. > > Thanks, > Cole I checked against CentOS5.5 (close enough). But right, it should not harm to have it. I re-submit the patch as soon as I have recovered my failed attempt to recover a raid failure... :/