Hi Daniel, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: [Tue Jan 23 2007, 10:49:07AM EST] > For HVM installs, the different should only be the addition of the > CDROM device. If you take a look in /var/log/xen/xend.log it should > show you the final SEXPR that XenD is getting when creating the > guest. Comparing the SEXPR seen when booting the config file, vs > that generated by virt-intsall may shed some more light on the > problem. > > Also, virt-install has a --debug flag which will make it show the libvirt > XML description it used to boot. Thanks for these suggestions. Yongkang looked at xend.log and found this: You, Yongkang wrote: [Thu Jan 25 2007, 10:26:33AM EST] > Thanks for the information. I have check /var/log/xen/xend.log. > Found something interesting. When using virt-install to install VTI > domain, it seemed didn't parse the right vcpu number to qemu-dm. > Please look at the following log: > > 1. The spawning qemu log, when installation by virt-intall with vcpu=4: > --------------------- > [2007-01-25 23:14:13 xend 2817] INFO (image:418) spawning device models: /usr/lib/xen/bin/qemu-dm ['/usr/lib/xen/bin/qemu-dm', '-d', '9', '-m', '1024', '-boot', 'c', '-acpi', '-domain-name', 'test', '-net', 'nic,vlan=1,macaddr=00:16:3e:0a:d2:86,model=rtl8139', '-net', 'tap,vlan=1,bridge=xenbr0', '-vncunused', '-vnclisten', '127.0.0.1'] > ~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > 2. The spawning qemu log, when use command "xm create": > ------------------------ > [2007-01-25 17:13:13 xend 2817] INFO (image:418) spawning device models: /usr/lib/xen/bin/qemu-dm ['/usr/lib/xen/bin/qemu-dm', '-d', '7', '-m', '1024', '-boot', 'd', '-vcpus', '4', '-acpi', '-domain-name', 'ExampleVTIDomain', '-net', 'nic,vlan=1,macaddr=00:16:3e:31:42:c4,model=rtl8139', '-net', 'tap,vlan=1,bridge=xenbr0', '-vncviewer'] > ~~~~~~~~~~~ > > There is "-vcpus 4" in the 2nd log. It means qemu would create up > a 4 vpucs VTI domain. > > For the situation 1, although qemu doesn't get any information about > "vcpu=4". But xen has already prepared 2 vcpus to qemu. Will it be > the problem? I'm looking through the code now to see if I can find where this is going awry, but while I'm looking, does this ring a bell for you? Thanks, Aron