Re: Report on Xen-4.6rc2 from virt7-xen-46-candidate

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 





On 09/09/2015 11:40 AM, George Dunlap wrote:
On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 11:25 PM, T.Weyergraf <T.Weyergraf@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi

I gave the new Xen-4.6rc2 a spin on a CentOS 7 virtualisation guest
(nested-xen). I haven't yet started testing guests, but rather looked at the
install itself.

One issue, I found, was with xenstored.service and the corresponding
unit-file:

[root@xencen7ws ~]# systemctl status xenstored
xenstored.service - The Xen xenstore
    Loaded: loaded (/usr/lib/systemd/system/xenstored.service; disabled)
    Active: active (running) since Tue 2015-09-08 23:13:43 CEST; 13min ago
   Process: 757 ExecStartPre=/bin/mkdir -p /var/run/xen (code=exited,
status=0/SUCCESS)
   Process: 753 ExecStartPre=/bin/rm -f /var/lib/xenstored/tdb* (code=exited,
status=0/SUCCESS)
   Process: 740 ExecStartPre=/bin/grep -q control_d /proc/xen/capabilities
(code=exited, status=0/SUCCESS)
  Main PID: 760 (xenstored)
    CGroup: /system.slice/xenstored.service
            └─760 /usr/sbin/xenstored

Sep 08 23:13:43 xencen7ws.virtfinity.local xenstored[760]: TDB: tdb_open_ex:
could not open file /var/lib/xenstored/tdb: No such file or directory
Sep 08 23:13:43 xencen7ws.virtfinity.local xenstored[760]: Checking store
...
Sep 08 23:13:43 xencen7ws.virtfinity.local xenstored[760]: Checking store
complete.
Sep 08 23:13:43 xencen7ws.virtfinity.local xenstored[760]: xenstored is
ready
Sep 08 23:13:43 xencen7ws.virtfinity.local systemd[1]: Started The Xen
xenstore.

As you can see, xenstored.service is running, but disabled by the package
installation. This is, because xenstored.service apparently got overseen in
the source-rpm's spec-file's post runtime/preun runtime. See diff [1] for
details.
The Xen documentation (in INSTALL) recommends enabing
xen-init-dom0.service, xenconsoled.service, and
xen-qemu-dom0-disk-backend.service.  I didn't specifically enable
xenstored, because I figured that was the "systemd way" -- specify the
dependencies, specify what you actually want (i.e., a xen dom0), and
let it sort out what actually needs to be started.

Is there a good reason to specifically enable xenstored, even though
it will start automatically because of dependencies?

(I really am asking here -- this whole systemd thing is really new to me.)
If the Xen docs (which I haven't checked) state it should not be enabled, it's probably best to follow that advice. xenstored is a bit tricky, as it's not designed to be started/stopped or restarted as a regular service. For my initial report, I checked the stuff I recycled from fedora, which indeed enables xenstored.service and uses a pidfile. From an administrative point of view, I like pidfiles, as they allow to check a service from a script with very little effort. xenstored-pidfiles have been present all the time except until lately (apparently) and I dislike changing things like that without good reason.
Suffice to say, that there might be a good reason.
I found the initial systemd-related patches to Xen, adding the unit files, but I still need to find the patches changing that behaviour and explaining the reasons.

Also, I think xenstored should write a pidfile. You might consider adding to
/usr/lib/systemd/system/xenstored.service:
PIDFile=/var/run/xenstored.pid
and change
ExecStart=/usr/sbin/xenstored
to
ExecStart=/usr/sbin/xenstored --pid-file /var/run/xenstored.pid
$XENSTORED_ARGS

Hope this helps, this is just a quick start. I'll continue checking and
reporting during the next days.
I think because systemd doesn't do forking, that it doesn't need a
pidfile.  In fact, if xenstored detects that it's running under
systemd, it will actually ignore the --pid-file directive.
A quick check shows xenstored for systemd to create the socket (in the systemd case). I will read up more code and patches.

For the time being, you are right. Let's not change, what appears to be there for a reason. Once up and running, your packages provide a working xenstored, so there is nothing "broken" by any means.

  -George
Regards,
Thomas

_______________________________________________
CentOS-virt mailing list
CentOS-virt@xxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt

_______________________________________________
CentOS-virt mailing list
CentOS-virt@xxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt




[Index of Archives]     [CentOS Users]     [Linux Media]     [Asterisk]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [X.org]     [Xfree86]     [Linux USB]

  Powered by Linux