You may also want to investigate on whether you are seeing a race condition
with /dev/vport0p1 coming on line and cloud-early-config running. It will
be indicated by a log line in the systemvm /var/log/cloud.log:

log_it "/dev/vport0p1 not loaded, perhaps guest kernel is too old."

Actually, if it has anything to do with the virtio-serial socket that would
probably be logged. Can you open a bug in Jira and provide the logs?

On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 9:36 AM, Marcus <shadow...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Can you provide more info? Is the host running CentOS 6.x, or is your
> systemvm? What is rebooted, the host or the router, and how is it rebooted?
>  We have what sounds like the same config (CentOS 6.x hosts, stock
> community provided systemvm), and are running thousands of virtual routers,
> rebooted regularly with no issue (both hosts and virtual routers).  One
> setting we may have that you may not is that our system vms are rebuilt
> from scratch on every reboot (recreate.systemvm.enabled=true in global
> settings), not that I expect this to be the problem, but might be something
> to look at.
>
> On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 8:49 AM, John Skinner <john.skin...@appcore.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I have found that on CloudStack 4.2 + (when we changed to using the
>> virtio-socket to send data to the systemvm) when running CentOS 6.X
>> cloud-early-config fails. On new systemvm creation there is a high chance
>> for success, but still a chance for failure. After the systemvm has been
>> created a simple reboot will cause start to fail every time. This has been
>> confirmed on 2 separate CloudStack 4.2 environments; 1 running CentOS 6.3
>> KVM, and another running CentOS 6.2 KVM. This can be fixed with a simple
>> modification to the get_boot_params function in the cloud-early-config
>> script. If you wrap the while read line inside of another while that checks
>> if $cmd returns an empty string it fixes the issue.
>>
>> This is a pretty nasty issue for any one running CloudStack 4.2 + on
>> CentOS 6.X
>>
>> John Skinner
>> Appcore
>
>
>

Reply via email to