On Fri, Nov 08, 2013 at 01:13:59PM +0000, David Vrabel wrote: > Keir, > > Sorry, forgot to CC you on this series. > > Can we have your opinion on whether this kexec series can be merged? > And if not, what further work and/or testing is required? > > On 07/11/13 21:16, Daniel Kiper wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 06, 2013 at 02:49:37PM +0000, David Vrabel wrote: > >> The series (for Xen 4.4) improves the kexec hypercall by making Xen > >> responsible for loading and relocating the image. This allows kexec > >> to be usable by pv-ops kernels and should allow kexec to be usable > >> from a HVM or PVH privileged domain. > >> > >> I have now tested this with a Linux kernel image using the VGA console > >> which was what was causing problems in v9 (this turned out to be a > >> kexec-tools bug). > >> > >> The required patch series for kexec-tools will be posted shortly and > >> are available from the xen-v7 branch of: > > > > In general it works. However, quite often I am not able to execute panic > > kernel. Machine hangs with following message: > > I cannot reproduce any failures, neither on my dev box nor on any of the > automated XenServer tests that run on a range of different hardware > platforms. I find kexec to be very reliable and an earlier version of > this series has been in production within XenServer for a while now and > has seen real use in the field. > > None of the issues reported so far have been regressions but failures in > specific uses of the new support for pv-ops kernels. > > I really can't see how I can do anything else to make this series > acceptable for merging. I think that in general it is OK. However, we must solve discovered issues or confirm that it is not a problem of current implementation. That is all. I hope that we finally do that next week (FYI, Monday is public holiday in Poland). Additionally, we agreed that shortly after applying this patch series we decide that registers should be cleared before jumping into new image or not. I think that it will be done quickly too. Daniel
