[libvirt] cont command failing via JSON monitor on restore
libvirt 0.8.7 qemu 0.13 I'm looking into a problem with qemu save/restore via JSON monitor. On restore, the vm is left in a paused state with following error returned for 'cont' command An incoming migration is expected before this command can be executed I was trying to debug the issue in gdb, but stepping through the code introduces enough delay between qemudStartVMDaemon() and doStartCPUs() that the latter succeeds. Any suggestions on how to determine when it is safe to call doStartCPUs() to prevent the above error? I don't see this issue with the text monitor btw. Thanks, Jim
On 01/12/2011 05:13 PM, Jim Fehlig wrote:
libvirt 0.8.7 qemu 0.13
I'm looking into a problem with qemu save/restore via JSON monitor. On restore, the vm is left in a paused state with following error returned for 'cont' command
An incoming migration is expected before this command can be executed
I was trying to debug the issue in gdb, but stepping through the code introduces enough delay between qemudStartVMDaemon() and doStartCPUs() that the latter succeeds. Any suggestions on how to determine when it is safe to call doStartCPUs() to prevent the above error? I don't see this issue with the text monitor btw.
I'm pretty sure this is related to a bug I reported on qemu-devel last April: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2010-04/msg00635.html (be sure to read my own followup if you want a correct description of the circumstances). In this case libvirt was using the text monitor, and there was a race condition between qemudStartVMDaemon (which executes qemu with '-S -incoming') and doStartCPUs() (which issues a 'cont' command to the qemu monitor). The result would be that sometimes the 'cont' would be received and processed by qemu before the incoming migration had started, meaning that qemu would be executing garbage memory instead of the saved/restored image of the guest. The solution to this was posted to upstream qemu in July: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2010-07/msg01574.html and I believe is in qemu 0.13. That patch adds a check to the 'cont' command so that if '-incoming' was specified on the commandline, 'cont' will only execute after a migration has successfully completed, but will otherwise return an error. Actually, thinking about this "fix", it seems that it isn't really a solution, because instead of the guest starting up in an indeterminate state, doStartCPUs() will just fail (as you've seen) making the entire guest startup fail. You can almost surely make it work properly by putting in a 250msec delay between those two function calls in libvirt. It would be nice if it could be totally fixed in qemu, though, so that libvirt didn't need such a hack :-( (I had unfortunately lost track of the bug by the time the patch was posted - it had been there for so long I'd just gotten used to manually pausing/unpausing any guest I wanted to save on the one machine that displays the problem. Too bad I got so used to living with it, as I'd have otherwise been forced to try it out (this machine is running F13, which is still at qemu-0.12.5, which doesn't have the patch).
On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 11:29:27PM -0500, Laine Stump wrote:
On 01/12/2011 05:13 PM, Jim Fehlig wrote:
libvirt 0.8.7 qemu 0.13
I'm looking into a problem with qemu save/restore via JSON monitor. On restore, the vm is left in a paused state with following error returned for 'cont' command
An incoming migration is expected before this command can be executed
I was trying to debug the issue in gdb, but stepping through the code introduces enough delay between qemudStartVMDaemon() and doStartCPUs() that the latter succeeds. Any suggestions on how to determine when it is safe to call doStartCPUs() to prevent the above error? I don't see this issue with the text monitor btw.
I'm pretty sure this is related to a bug I reported on qemu-devel last April:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2010-04/msg00635.html
(be sure to read my own followup if you want a correct description of the circumstances). In this case libvirt was using the text monitor, and there was a race condition between qemudStartVMDaemon (which executes qemu with '-S -incoming') and doStartCPUs() (which issues a 'cont' command to the qemu monitor). The result would be that sometimes the 'cont' would be received and processed by qemu before the incoming migration had started, meaning that qemu would be executing garbage memory instead of the saved/restored image of the guest.
The solution to this was posted to upstream qemu in July:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2010-07/msg01574.html
and I believe is in qemu 0.13. That patch adds a check to the 'cont' command so that if '-incoming' was specified on the commandline, 'cont' will only execute after a migration has successfully completed, but will otherwise return an error.
Actually, thinking about this "fix", it seems that it isn't really a solution, because instead of the guest starting up in an indeterminate state, doStartCPUs() will just fail (as you've seen) making the entire guest startup fail.
Yep, it wasn't really intended as a fix. It was intended to make the error scenario clearly detectable, which has succeeded as per Jim's report. The fact that QMP returned an error in this way, means we can now reliably detect, usleep(1000), and then retry the 'cont' again at which point we should succeed.
You can almost surely make it work properly by putting in a 250msec delay between those two function calls in libvirt. It would be nice if it could be totally fixed in qemu, though, so that libvirt didn't need such a hack :-(
I don't mind the sleep, since we only need todo it if we see the explicit QMP error reported. We can do 250ms sleeps in a loop until it succeeeds, so there won't be an artifical delay that users will actually notice. Regards, Daniel
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 11:29:27PM -0500, Laine Stump wrote:
On 01/12/2011 05:13 PM, Jim Fehlig wrote:
libvirt 0.8.7 qemu 0.13
I'm looking into a problem with qemu save/restore via JSON monitor. On restore, the vm is left in a paused state with following error returned for 'cont' command
An incoming migration is expected before this command can be executed
I was trying to debug the issue in gdb, but stepping through the code introduces enough delay between qemudStartVMDaemon() and doStartCPUs() that the latter succeeds. Any suggestions on how to determine when it is safe to call doStartCPUs() to prevent the above error? I don't see this issue with the text monitor btw.
I'm pretty sure this is related to a bug I reported on qemu-devel last April:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2010-04/msg00635.html
(be sure to read my own followup if you want a correct description of the circumstances). In this case libvirt was using the text monitor, and there was a race condition between qemudStartVMDaemon (which executes qemu with '-S -incoming') and doStartCPUs() (which issues a 'cont' command to the qemu monitor). The result would be that sometimes the 'cont' would be received and processed by qemu before the incoming migration had started, meaning that qemu would be executing garbage memory instead of the saved/restored image of the guest.
The solution to this was posted to upstream qemu in July:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2010-07/msg01574.html
and I believe is in qemu 0.13. That patch adds a check to the 'cont' command so that if '-incoming' was specified on the commandline, 'cont' will only execute after a migration has successfully completed, but will otherwise return an error.
Actually, thinking about this "fix", it seems that it isn't really a solution, because instead of the guest starting up in an indeterminate state, doStartCPUs() will just fail (as you've seen) making the entire guest startup fail.
Yep, it wasn't really intended as a fix. It was intended to make the error scenario clearly detectable, which has succeeded as per Jim's report. The fact that QMP returned an error in this way, means we can now reliably detect, usleep(1000), and then retry the 'cont' again at which point we should succeed.
Something like the attached patch? I'm not quite sure about the retry bounds (currently 1 second). In my testing, it always succeeds on the second attempt - even with large memory vms. Regards, Jim
On 01/13/2011 04:29 PM, Jim Fehlig wrote:
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
Yep, it wasn't really intended as a fix. It was intended to make the error scenario clearly detectable, which has succeeded as per Jim's report. The fact that QMP returned an error in this way, means we can now reliably detect, usleep(1000), and then retry the 'cont' again at which point we should succeed.
Something like the attached patch? I'm not quite sure about the retry bounds (currently 1 second). In my testing, it always succeeds on the second attempt - even with large memory vms.
In my tests, 250ms was more than enough, so I'm guessing it's okay, although there's probably no hurt in making it a bit larger - it's not like this is something that repeats all day every day :-) Would it be possible for you to add the same thing into the text monitor version of the code, so both fixes would travel together as the patch gets cherry-picked around?
0001-qemu-Retry-JSON-monitor-cont-cmd-on-MigrationExpecte.patch
From ec9109b40a4b2c45035495e0e4f65824a92dcf3d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Jim Fehlig<jfehlig@novell.com> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2011 12:52:23 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] qemu: Retry JSON monitor cont cmd on MigrationExpected error
When restoring a saved qemu instance via JSON monitor, the vm is left in a paused state. Turns out the 'cont' cmd was failing with "MigrationExpected" error class and "An incoming migration is expected before this command can be executed" error description due to migration (restore) not yet complete.
Detect if 'cont' cmd fails with "MigrationExpecte" error class and retry 'cont' cmd. --- src/qemu/qemu_monitor_json.c | 20 +++++++++++++++++--- 1 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/qemu/qemu_monitor_json.c b/src/qemu/qemu_monitor_json.c index 7877731..63b736e 100644 --- a/src/qemu/qemu_monitor_json.c +++ b/src/qemu/qemu_monitor_json.c @@ -702,13 +702,27 @@ qemuMonitorJSONStartCPUs(qemuMonitorPtr mon, int ret; virJSONValuePtr cmd = qemuMonitorJSONMakeCommand("cont", NULL); virJSONValuePtr reply = NULL; + int i = 0, timeout = 3; if (!cmd) return -1;
- ret = qemuMonitorJSONCommand(mon, cmd,&reply); + do { + ret = qemuMonitorJSONCommand(mon, cmd,&reply);
- if (ret == 0) - ret = qemuMonitorJSONCheckError(cmd, reply); + if (ret != 0) + break; + + /* If no error, we're done */ + if ((ret = qemuMonitorJSONCheckError(cmd, reply)) == 0) + break; + + /* If error class is not MigrationExpected, we're done. + * Otherwise try 'cont' cmd again */ + if (!qemuMonitorJSONHasError(reply, "MigrationExpected")) + break; + + virJSONValueFree(reply); + } while ((++i<= timeout)&& (usleep(250000)<=0));
virJSONValueFree(cmd); virJSONValueFree(reply);
Doesn't this end up doing a double-free of reply if it times out? virJSONValueFree doesn't update the pointer that's free'd like VIR_FREE does (it can't, since it's a function call rather than a macro).
Laine Stump wrote:
On 01/13/2011 04:29 PM, Jim Fehlig wrote:
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
Yep, it wasn't really intended as a fix. It was intended to make the error scenario clearly detectable, which has succeeded as per Jim's report. The fact that QMP returned an error in this way, means we can now reliably detect, usleep(1000), and then retry the 'cont' again at which point we should succeed.
Something like the attached patch? I'm not quite sure about the retry bounds (currently 1 second). In my testing, it always succeeds on the second attempt - even with large memory vms.
In my tests, 250ms was more than enough, so I'm guessing it's okay, although there's probably no hurt in making it a bit larger - it's not like this is something that repeats all day every day :-)
Would it be possible for you to add the same thing into the text monitor version of the code, so both fixes would travel together as the patch gets cherry-picked around?
I can, but have not seen this issue with the text monitor. And the error reporting is not so fine grained correct?
0001-qemu-Retry-JSON-monitor-cont-cmd-on-MigrationExpecte.patch
From ec9109b40a4b2c45035495e0e4f65824a92dcf3d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Jim Fehlig<jfehlig@novell.com> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2011 12:52:23 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] qemu: Retry JSON monitor cont cmd on MigrationExpected error
When restoring a saved qemu instance via JSON monitor, the vm is left in a paused state. Turns out the 'cont' cmd was failing with "MigrationExpected" error class and "An incoming migration is expected before this command can be executed" error description due to migration (restore) not yet complete.
Detect if 'cont' cmd fails with "MigrationExpecte" error class and retry 'cont' cmd. --- src/qemu/qemu_monitor_json.c | 20 +++++++++++++++++--- 1 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/qemu/qemu_monitor_json.c b/src/qemu/qemu_monitor_json.c index 7877731..63b736e 100644 --- a/src/qemu/qemu_monitor_json.c +++ b/src/qemu/qemu_monitor_json.c @@ -702,13 +702,27 @@ qemuMonitorJSONStartCPUs(qemuMonitorPtr mon, int ret; virJSONValuePtr cmd = qemuMonitorJSONMakeCommand("cont", NULL); virJSONValuePtr reply = NULL; + int i = 0, timeout = 3; if (!cmd) return -1;
- ret = qemuMonitorJSONCommand(mon, cmd,&reply); + do { + ret = qemuMonitorJSONCommand(mon, cmd,&reply);
- if (ret == 0) - ret = qemuMonitorJSONCheckError(cmd, reply); + if (ret != 0) + break; + + /* If no error, we're done */ + if ((ret = qemuMonitorJSONCheckError(cmd, reply)) == 0) + break; + + /* If error class is not MigrationExpected, we're done. + * Otherwise try 'cont' cmd again */ + if (!qemuMonitorJSONHasError(reply, "MigrationExpected")) + break; + + virJSONValueFree(reply); + } while ((++i<= timeout)&& (usleep(250000)<=0));
virJSONValueFree(cmd); virJSONValueFree(reply);
Doesn't this end up doing a double-free of reply if it times out? virJSONValueFree doesn't update the pointer that's free'd like VIR_FREE does (it can't, since it's a function call rather than a macro).
virJSONValueFree() calls VIR_FREE() on the value passed to it, so reply should be set to NULL when virJSONValueFree() returns. While looking at the patch again, not sure I'm fond of the while ((++i<= timeout) && (usleep(250000)<=0)); Perhaps should move the usleep inside the loop and clean that up a bit. Regards, Jim
On 01/14/2011 04:26 PM, Jim Fehlig wrote:
Laine Stump wrote:
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
Yep, it wasn't really intended as a fix. It was intended to make the error scenario clearly detectable, which has succeeded as per Jim's report. The fact that QMP returned an error in this way, means we can now reliably detect, usleep(1000), and then retry the 'cont' again at which point we should succeed.
Something like the attached patch? I'm not quite sure about the retry bounds (currently 1 second). In my testing, it always succeeds on the second attempt - even with large memory vms. In my tests, 250ms was more than enough, so I'm guessing it's okay, although there's probably no hurt in making it a bit larger - it's not
On 01/13/2011 04:29 PM, Jim Fehlig wrote: like this is something that repeats all day every day :-)
Would it be possible for you to add the same thing into the text monitor version of the code, so both fixes would travel together as the patch gets cherry-picked around? I can, but have not seen this issue with the text monitor. And the error reporting is not so fine grained correct?
Truthfully I haven't spent any time with the JSON code, and only enough with the text monitor to (locally) put in a rough hack for the same problem - I just delayed 250ms unconditionally. Maybe it is safest for your patch to just have what you're able to test for. Of course my system isn't setup to test exactly this fix either - the machine that displays the problem when resuming is still running qemu-kvm-0.12.5.
- if (ret == 0) - ret = qemuMonitorJSONCheckError(cmd, reply); + if (ret != 0) + break; + + /* If no error, we're done */ + if ((ret = qemuMonitorJSONCheckError(cmd, reply)) == 0) + break; + + /* If error class is not MigrationExpected, we're done. + * Otherwise try 'cont' cmd again */ + if (!qemuMonitorJSONHasError(reply, "MigrationExpected")) + break; + + virJSONValueFree(reply); + } while ((++i<= timeout)&& (usleep(250000)<=0));
virJSONValueFree(cmd); virJSONValueFree(reply); Doesn't this end up doing a double-free of reply if it times out? virJSONValueFree doesn't update the pointer that's free'd like VIR_FREE does (it can't, since it's a function call rather than a macro). virJSONValueFree() calls VIR_FREE() on the value passed to it, so reply should be set to NULL when virJSONValueFree() returns.
Yes, but it's pass by value, not reference, so VIR_FREE() is NULLing the copy of the pointer that was passed as an argument, not the original pointer itself.
While looking at the patch again, not sure I'm fond of the
while ((++i<= timeout)&& (usleep(250000)<=0));
Perhaps should move the usleep inside the loop and clean that up a bit.
Laine Stump wrote:
On 01/14/2011 04:26 PM, Jim Fehlig wrote:
Laine Stump wrote:
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
Yep, it wasn't really intended as a fix. It was intended to make the error scenario clearly detectable, which has succeeded as per Jim's report. The fact that QMP returned an error in this way, means we can now reliably detect, usleep(1000), and then retry the 'cont' again at which point we should succeed.
Something like the attached patch? I'm not quite sure about the retry bounds (currently 1 second). In my testing, it always succeeds on the second attempt - even with large memory vms. In my tests, 250ms was more than enough, so I'm guessing it's okay, although there's probably no hurt in making it a bit larger - it's not
On 01/13/2011 04:29 PM, Jim Fehlig wrote: like this is something that repeats all day every day :-)
Would it be possible for you to add the same thing into the text monitor version of the code, so both fixes would travel together as the patch gets cherry-picked around? I can, but have not seen this issue with the text monitor. And the error reporting is not so fine grained correct?
Truthfully I haven't spent any time with the JSON code, and only enough with the text monitor to (locally) put in a rough hack for the same problem - I just delayed 250ms unconditionally.
Maybe it is safest for your patch to just have what you're able to test for.
Agreed. What error do you get back from the text monitor when cont cmd fails? I'd be interested in the following output from $root/src/qemu/qemu_monitor_text.c:qemuMonitorCommandWithHandler() VIR_DEBUG("Receive command reply ret=%d errno=%d %d bytes '%s'", ret, msg.lastErrno, msg.rxLength, msg.rxBuffer);
Of course my system isn't setup to test exactly this fix either - the machine that displays the problem when resuming is still running qemu-kvm-0.12.5.
- if (ret == 0) - ret = qemuMonitorJSONCheckError(cmd, reply); + if (ret != 0) + break; + + /* If no error, we're done */ + if ((ret = qemuMonitorJSONCheckError(cmd, reply)) == 0) + break; + + /* If error class is not MigrationExpected, we're done. + * Otherwise try 'cont' cmd again */ + if (!qemuMonitorJSONHasError(reply, "MigrationExpected")) + break; + + virJSONValueFree(reply); + } while ((++i<= timeout)&& (usleep(250000)<=0));
virJSONValueFree(cmd); virJSONValueFree(reply); Doesn't this end up doing a double-free of reply if it times out? virJSONValueFree doesn't update the pointer that's free'd like VIR_FREE does (it can't, since it's a function call rather than a macro). virJSONValueFree() calls VIR_FREE() on the value passed to it, so reply should be set to NULL when virJSONValueFree() returns.
Yes, but it's pass by value, not reference, so VIR_FREE() is NULLing the copy of the pointer that was passed as an argument, not the original pointer itself.
Err, right. I'll fix this in v2 - but need to understand the text monitor error first. Thanks, Jim
On 01/18/2011 01:15 PM, Jim Fehlig wrote:
Laine Stump wrote:
On 01/14/2011 04:26 PM, Jim Fehlig wrote:
Laine Stump wrote:
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> Yep, it wasn't really intended as a fix. It was intended to make > the error scenario clearly detectable, which has succeeded as per > Jim's report. The fact that QMP returned an error in this way, > means we can now reliably detect, usleep(1000), and then retry > the 'cont' again at which point we should succeed. > Something like the attached patch? I'm not quite sure about the retry bounds (currently 1 second). In my testing, it always succeeds on the second attempt - even with large memory vms. In my tests, 250ms was more than enough, so I'm guessing it's okay, although there's probably no hurt in making it a bit larger - it's not
On 01/13/2011 04:29 PM, Jim Fehlig wrote: like this is something that repeats all day every day :-)
Would it be possible for you to add the same thing into the text monitor version of the code, so both fixes would travel together as the patch gets cherry-picked around? I can, but have not seen this issue with the text monitor. And the error reporting is not so fine grained correct? Truthfully I haven't spent any time with the JSON code, and only enough with the text monitor to (locally) put in a rough hack for the same problem - I just delayed 250ms unconditionally.
Maybe it is safest for your patch to just have what you're able to test for. Agreed. What error do you get back from the text monitor when cont cmd fails?
Right now the machine that experiences this failure is stuck on qemu-0.12.5, so it doesn't fail, it "succeeds" :-) (since it doesn't have the necessary qemu patch, when "cont" is run before the migration has been able to start, it just believes that it was successful, and starts the CPU up with garbage in the guest memory.) I'll try to get qemu-0.13 installed on this machine as soon as I can, but I'm trying to get something else fixed before Thursday.
I'd be interested in the following output from $root/src/qemu/qemu_monitor_text.c:qemuMonitorCommandWithHandler()
VIR_DEBUG("Receive command reply ret=%d errno=%d %d bytes '%s'", ret, msg.lastErrno, msg.rxLength, msg.rxBuffer);
Of course my system isn't setup to test exactly this fix either - the machine that displays the problem when resuming is still running qemu-kvm-0.12.5.
- if (ret == 0) - ret = qemuMonitorJSONCheckError(cmd, reply); + if (ret != 0) + break; + + /* If no error, we're done */ + if ((ret = qemuMonitorJSONCheckError(cmd, reply)) == 0) + break; + + /* If error class is not MigrationExpected, we're done. + * Otherwise try 'cont' cmd again */ + if (!qemuMonitorJSONHasError(reply, "MigrationExpected")) + break; + + virJSONValueFree(reply); + } while ((++i<= timeout)&& (usleep(250000)<=0));
virJSONValueFree(cmd); virJSONValueFree(reply); Doesn't this end up doing a double-free of reply if it times out? virJSONValueFree doesn't update the pointer that's free'd like VIR_FREE does (it can't, since it's a function call rather than a macro). virJSONValueFree() calls VIR_FREE() on the value passed to it, so reply should be set to NULL when virJSONValueFree() returns.
Yes, but it's pass by value, not reference, so VIR_FREE() is NULLing the copy of the pointer that was passed as an argument, not the original pointer itself. Err, right. I'll fix this in v2 - but need to understand the text monitor error first.
I'll do my best to get to it as soon as possible.
Thanks, Jim
Jim Fehlig wrote:
Agreed. What error do you get back from the text monitor when cont cmd fails? I'd be interested in the following output from $root/src/qemu/qemu_monitor_text.c:qemuMonitorCommandWithHandler()
VIR_DEBUG("Receive command reply ret=%d errno=%d %d bytes '%s'", ret, msg.lastErrno, msg.rxLength, msg.rxBuffer);
Since I cannot reproduce the issue with qemu 0.13 using the text monitor, I hacked qemu to simulate the error and got the following from the debug message Receive command reply ret=0 errno=0 71 bytes 'An incoming migration is expected before this command can be executed' msg.lastErrno is 0 (which is why ret is 0), but we've received the "An incoming migration ..." error message. The message is available in reply variable in $root/src/qemu/qemu_monitor_text.c:qemuMonitorTextStartCPUs(), but that's not a very robust way to check for error. Seems qemu should return an error in addition to the message. I'm not familiar with the qemu monitor code, but I suspect the qemu patch you referenced [1] was insufficient wrt the text monitor. I think a patch addressing the issue in the JSON monitor, where we can reliably detect the error, is a good start. Would that be okay? Also, recall that I cannot reproduce the issue with qemu 0.13. Perhaps other post-0.12.5 changes have "fixed" the bug in the text monitor. Regards, Jim [1] http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2010-07/msg01574.html
Hello, Am Donnerstag 20 Januar 2011 04:05:46 schrieb Jim Fehlig:
I think a patch addressing the issue in the JSON monitor, where we can reliably detect the error, is a good start. Would that be okay? Also, recall that I cannot reproduce the issue with qemu 0.13.
We can reliably reproduct the error condition: It happens when the host is loaded and an additional VM is started. Sometime you have to start a VM several times, but we regularly experience paused VMs, which can only be unpaused via virsh qemu-monitor-command "$vm" "cont" since libvirt thinks they are already running. I normally hard-link the save image files to another name (*.PMH), so I can repeatly restore the same state again and again. Since the disk image is NOT snapshotted, it's content gets corrupted over time, but for testing it's okay. I than execute the following loop until I detect the broken state: while virsh qemu-monitor-command "$vm" "info status" | grep running do virsh destroy "$vm" ln "$vm.save.PMH" "$vm.save" virsh start "$vm" sleep 1 done
Perhaps other post-0.12.5 changes have "fixed" the bug in the text monitor.
This still happens with qemu-0.14 (and in this case libvirt-0.8.7): 17:50:19.586: 29813: warning : qemudStartVMDaemon:2864 : Executing done /usr/bin/kvm 17:50:19.787: 29813: debug : qemuMonitorOpen:682 : New mon 0x7fad280068c0 fd =29 watch=61 17:50:19.787: 29813: debug : qemuMonitorSetCapabilities:905 : mon=0x7fad280068c0 17:50:19.787: 29813: debug : qemuMonitorGetPtyPaths:1706 : mon=0x7fad280068c0 17:50:19.787: 29813: debug : qemuMonitorCommandWithHandler:231 : Send command 'info chardev' for write with FD -1 17:50:19.909: 29813: debug : qemuMonitorCommandWithHandler:236 : Receive command reply ret=0 errno=0 83 bytes 'monitor: filename=unix:/var/lib/libvirt/qemu/XXX.monitor,server ' 17:50:19.909: 29813: debug : qemuMonitorGetCPUInfo:985 : mon=0x7fad280068c0 17:50:19.909: 29813: debug : qemuMonitorCommandWithHandler:231 : Send command 'info cpus' for write with FD -1 17:50:19.909: 29813: debug : qemuMonitorCommandWithHandler:236 : Receive command reply ret=0 errno=0 49 bytes '* CPU #0: pc=0x00000000fffffff0 thread_id=5011 ' 17:50:19.909: 29813: debug : qemuMonitorTextGetCPUInfo:448 : vcpu=0 pid=5011 17:50:19.909: 29813: debug : qemuMonitorSetBalloon:1116 : mon=0x7fad280068c0 newmem=1048576 17:50:19.909: 29813: debug : qemuMonitorCommandWithHandler:231 : Send command 'balloon 1024' for write with FD -1 17:50:19.909: 29813: debug : qemuMonitorCommandWithHandler:236 : Receive command reply ret=0 errno=0 0 bytes '(null)' 17:50:19.909: 29813: debug : qemuMonitorStartCPUs:926 : mon=0x7fad280068c0 17:50:19.910: 29813: debug : qemuMonitorCommandWithHandler:231 : Send command 'cont' for write with FD -1 17:50:19.911: 29813: debug : qemuMonitorCommandWithHandler:236 : Receive command reply ret=0 errno=0 71 bytes 'An incoming migration is expected before this command can be executed ' Sincerely Philipp -- Philipp Hahn Open Source Software Engineer hahn@univention.de Univention GmbH Linux for Your Business fon: +49 421 22 232- 0 Mary-Somerville-Str.1 D-28359 Bremen fax: +49 421 22 232-99 http://www.univention.de/
participants (4)
-
Daniel P. Berrange -
Jim Fehlig -
Laine Stump -
Philipp Hahn