On 10/25/2011 03:18 PM, Dave Anderson wrote:
> >
> > Crash uses a heuristic based on the IDT base to identify the base from
> > migrate-to-file output. It also needs CR3 in order to read from virtual
> > address.
>
> Just to clarify -- the need for the IDT base and cr3 is *only* true for
> KVM d
- Original Message -
> On 10/25/2011 10:23 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> > On 10/25/2011 10:06 AM, Wen Congyang wrote:
> >> Hi, Avi Kivity, Dave Anderson
> >>
> >> I have two questions about it:
> >>
> >> 1. How to know the guest's physical base address in qemu?
> >
> > In fact, it's impossible
On 2011-10-25 10:56, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 10/25/2011 10:52 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
Crash uses a heuristic based on the IDT base to identify the base from
migrate-to-file output. It also needs CR3 in order to read from
virtual address.
>> Does elf not store cr3? Perhaps a note
On 10/25/2011 10:52 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> Crash uses a heuristic based on the IDT base to identify the base from
> migrate-to-file output. It also needs CR3 in order to read from
> virtual address.
Does elf not store cr3? Perhaps a note with the contents of the
privileged cpu registers is
On 10/25/2011 10:35 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 10/25/2011 10:23 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
>> On 10/25/2011 10:06 AM, Wen Congyang wrote:
>>> Hi, Avi Kivity, Dave Anderson
>>>
>>> I have two questions about it:
>>>
>>> 1. How to know the guest's physical base address in qemu?
>>
>> In fact, it's impo
On 10/25/2011 10:23 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 10/25/2011 10:06 AM, Wen Congyang wrote:
Hi, Avi Kivity, Dave Anderson
I have two questions about it:
1. How to know the guest's physical base address in qemu?
In fact, it's impossible.
Perhaps crash can scan through the core looking for a signat
On 10/25/2011 10:06 AM, Wen Congyang wrote:
> Hi, Avi Kivity, Dave Anderson
>
> I have two questions about it:
>
> 1. How to know the guest's physical base address in qemu?
In fact, it's impossible.
Perhaps crash can scan through the core looking for a signature. Need
to be careful since multipl
At 10/24/2011 11:30 PM, Avi Kivity Write:
> On 10/24/2011 05:25 PM, Dave Anderson wrote:
>>
>> - Original Message -
>>> On 10/24/2011 04:25 PM, Dave Anderson wrote:
> The question is that: 'virsh dump' can not be used when host pci device
> is used by guest. We are discussing how to
On 2011-10-25 03:37, Wen Congyang wrote:
> At 10/24/2011 11:58 PM, Dave Anderson Write:
>>
>>
>> - Original Message -
>>
> No, an ELF image of the guest's physical memory.
Well then that should be pretty straight forward to support. Depending
upon
how similar it wo
At 10/24/2011 11:58 PM, Dave Anderson Write:
>
>
> - Original Message -
>
No, an ELF image of the guest's physical memory.
>>>
>>> Well then that should be pretty straight forward to support. Depending upon
>>> how similar it would be to the "standard" kdump ELF format, the only ot
- Original Message -
> > > No, an ELF image of the guest's physical memory.
> >
> > Well then that should be pretty straight forward to support. Depending upon
> > how similar it would be to the "standard" kdump ELF format, the only other
> > issue is how to determine the physical base
On 10/24/2011 05:25 PM, Dave Anderson wrote:
>
> - Original Message -
> > On 10/24/2011 04:25 PM, Dave Anderson wrote:
> > > > The question is that: 'virsh dump' can not be used when host pci device
> > > > is used by guest. We are discussing how to fix the problem. We have
> > > > determi
- Original Message -
> On 10/24/2011 04:25 PM, Dave Anderson wrote:
> > > The question is that: 'virsh dump' can not be used when host pci device
> > > is used by guest. We are discussing how to fix the problem. We have
> > > determined
> > > that introduce a new monitor command dump. Ja
On 10/24/2011 04:25 PM, Dave Anderson wrote:
> > The question is that: 'virsh dump' can not be used when host pci device
> > is used by guest. We are discussing how to fix the problem. We have
> > determined
> > that introduce a new monitor command dump. Jan suggested that the core
> > file's
> >
- Original Message -
> The question is that: 'virsh dump' can not be used when host pci device
> is used by guest. We are discussing how to fix the problem. We have determined
> that introduce a new monitor command dump. Jan suggested that the core file's
> format is gdb standard core fo
At 10/21/2011 09:02 PM, Dave Anderson Write:
>
>
> - Original Message -
>> At 10/21/2011 03:11 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
>>> On 2011-10-20 12:03, Wen Congyang wrote:
At 10/20/2011 05:41 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
> On 2011-10-20 03:22, Wen Congyang wrote:
I didn't read full story
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 09:02:37AM -0400, Dave Anderson wrote:
> It would be kind of cool if there was a "/dev/mem"-like interface
> to a KVM guest's physical memory, so that you could sit on a KVM host
> and enter "crash vmlinux-of-guest /dev/mem-of-guest" in order to
> run live analysis of a gues
On 2011-10-21 15:02, Dave Anderson wrote:
>
>
> - Original Message -
>> At 10/21/2011 03:11 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
>>> On 2011-10-20 12:03, Wen Congyang wrote:
At 10/20/2011 05:41 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
> On 2011-10-20 03:22, Wen Congyang wrote:
I didn't read full story bu
- Original Message -
> At 10/21/2011 03:11 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
> > On 2011-10-20 12:03, Wen Congyang wrote:
> >> At 10/20/2011 05:41 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
> >>> On 2011-10-20 03:22, Wen Congyang wrote:
> >> I didn't read full story but 'crash' is used for investigating kernel
> >>>
At 10/21/2011 03:11 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
> On 2011-10-20 12:03, Wen Congyang wrote:
>> At 10/20/2011 05:41 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
>>> On 2011-10-20 03:22, Wen Congyang wrote:
>> I didn't read full story but 'crash' is used for investigating kernel
>> core generated
>> by kdump for seve
On 2011-10-20 12:03, Wen Congyang wrote:
> At 10/20/2011 05:41 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
>> On 2011-10-20 03:22, Wen Congyang wrote:
> I didn't read full story but 'crash' is used for investigating kernel
> core generated
> by kdump for several years. Considering support service guys, virs
At 10/20/2011 05:41 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
> On 2011-10-20 03:22, Wen Congyang wrote:
I didn't read full story but 'crash' is used for investigating kernel core
generated
by kdump for several years. Considering support service guys, virsh dump
should support
a format for c
On 2011-10-20 03:22, Wen Congyang wrote:
>>> I didn't read full story but 'crash' is used for investigating kernel core
>>> generated
>>> by kdump for several years. Considering support service guys, virsh dump
>>> should support
>>> a format for crash because they can't work well at investigatin
At 10/19/2011 07:40 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
> On 2011-10-19 04:04, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
>> On Tue, 18 Oct 2011 10:31:10 +0200
>> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>
>>> On 2011-10-18 10:31, Wen Congyang wrote:
At 10/18/2011 04:26 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
> On 2011-10-18 10:25, Wen Congyang wrote:
>>
On 2011-10-19 04:04, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Oct 2011 10:31:10 +0200
> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>
>> On 2011-10-18 10:31, Wen Congyang wrote:
>>> At 10/18/2011 04:26 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
On 2011-10-18 10:25, Wen Congyang wrote:
> At 10/18/2011 04:19 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
>> O
On Tue, 18 Oct 2011 10:31:10 +0200
Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2011-10-18 10:31, Wen Congyang wrote:
> > At 10/18/2011 04:26 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
> >> On 2011-10-18 10:25, Wen Congyang wrote:
> >>> At 10/18/2011 04:19 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
> On 2011-10-18 09:58, Wen Congyang wrote:
> > At 10
At 10/18/2011 11:27 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
> On 2011-10-18 17:04, Wen Congyang wrote:
>> On 10/18/2011 10:21 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>> On 2011-10-18 16:17, Wen Congyang wrote:
>>>
>>> I was talking about information you need in the crash dump file that is
>>> not contained in those files crash proce
On 2011-10-18 17:04, Wen Congyang wrote:
> On 10/18/2011 10:21 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> On 2011-10-18 16:17, Wen Congyang wrote:
>>
>> I was talking about information you need in the crash dump file that is
>> not contained in those files crash processes by default. If there is no
>> such informati
On 10/18/2011 10:21 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2011-10-18 16:17, Wen Congyang wrote:
I was talking about information you need in the crash dump file that is
not contained in those files crash processes by default. If there is no
such information, then it looks strange to me defining a new format.
On 2011-10-18 16:17, Wen Congyang wrote:
> On 10/18/2011 09:55 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> On 2011-10-18 15:51, Wen Congyang wrote:
>>> On 10/18/2011 06:28 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2011-10-18 11:43, Wen Congyang wrote:
> At 10/18/2011 04:36 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
>> On 2011-10-18 10:34, Ri
On 10/18/2011 09:55 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2011-10-18 15:51, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 10/18/2011 06:28 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2011-10-18 11:43, Wen Congyang wrote:
At 10/18/2011 04:36 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
On 2011-10-18 10:34, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
Yeah, I see. Could also be solved via
On 2011-10-18 15:51, Wen Congyang wrote:
> On 10/18/2011 06:28 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> On 2011-10-18 11:43, Wen Congyang wrote:
>>> At 10/18/2011 04:36 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
On 2011-10-18 10:34, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
Yeah, I see. Could also be solved via gdb scripts, but crash i
On 10/18/2011 06:28 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2011-10-18 11:43, Wen Congyang wrote:
At 10/18/2011 04:36 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
On 2011-10-18 10:34, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
Yeah, I see. Could also be solved via gdb scripts, but crash is already
there.
But let's see if the formats actually diff
On 2011-10-18 15:30, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 12:47:23PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> On 2011-10-18 12:41, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>> On 10/18/2011 10:39 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>
>> Yeah, I see. Could also be solved via gdb scripts, but crash is already
>> ther
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 12:47:23PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2011-10-18 12:41, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > On 10/18/2011 10:39 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>
> Yeah, I see. Could also be solved via gdb scripts, but crash is already
> there.
> >> [ BTW, crash is for the dead. But having t
On 2011-10-18 15:08, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 02:47:39PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
Crash can also do live system analysis. :)
>>>
>>> crash in fact is gdb - with a lot of additional commands.
>>
>> Is there a trick to make it work against a gdbserver?
>
> No idea. I
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 02:47:39PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >> Crash can also do live system analysis. :)
> >
> > crash in fact is gdb - with a lot of additional commands.
>
> Is there a trick to make it work against a gdbserver?
No idea. I just noticed that crash was built around a gdb sourc
On 2011-10-18 12:42, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 12:41:10PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> On 10/18/2011 10:39 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>
> Yeah, I see. Could also be solved via gdb scripts, but crash is already
> there.
>>> [ BTW, crash is for the dead. But having
On 2011-10-18 12:41, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 10/18/2011 10:39 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
Yeah, I see. Could also be solved via gdb scripts, but crash is already
there.
>> [ BTW, crash is for the dead. But having those features in form of gdb
>> scripts would also allow live system ana
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 12:41:10PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 10/18/2011 10:39 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Yeah, I see. Could also be solved via gdb scripts, but crash is already
>>> > there.
>> [ BTW, crash is for the dead. But having those features in form of gdb
>> scripts would al
On 10/18/2011 10:39 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>
> Yeah, I see. Could also be solved via gdb scripts, but crash is already
> there.
[ BTW, crash is for the dead. But having those features in form of gdb
scripts would also allow live system analysis. Looks like it's worth
obsoleting crash on the lon
On 2011-10-18 11:43, Wen Congyang wrote:
> At 10/18/2011 04:36 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
>> On 2011-10-18 10:34, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>>
>> Yeah, I see. Could also be solved via gdb scripts, but crash is already
>> there.
>>
>> But let's see if the formats actually differ. In the end, crash is jus
At 10/18/2011 04:36 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
> On 2011-10-18 10:34, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>
> Yeah, I see. Could also be solved via gdb scripts, but crash is already
> there.
>
> But let's see if the formats actually differ. In the end, crash is just
> parsing the same information that also gdb
On 2011-10-18 10:36, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> Crash can decode kernel structures, providing for example process
>> listings and debugging into userspace processes. Crash actually
>> reuses gdb's code too, so it's kind of a superset.
>
> Yeah, I see. Could also be solved via gdb scripts, but crash is
On 2011-10-18 10:34, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 10:31:10AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> On 2011-10-18 10:31, Wen Congyang wrote:
>>> At 10/18/2011 04:26 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
On 2011-10-18 10:25, Wen Congyang wrote:
> At 10/18/2011 04:19 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
>>
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 10:31:10AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2011-10-18 10:31, Wen Congyang wrote:
> > At 10/18/2011 04:26 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
> >> On 2011-10-18 10:25, Wen Congyang wrote:
> >>> At 10/18/2011 04:19 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
> On 2011-10-18 09:58, Wen Congyang wrote:
> >
On 2011-10-18 10:31, Wen Congyang wrote:
> At 10/18/2011 04:26 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
>> On 2011-10-18 10:25, Wen Congyang wrote:
>>> At 10/18/2011 04:19 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
On 2011-10-18 09:58, Wen Congyang wrote:
> At 10/18/2011 03:52 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
>> On 2011-10-18 09:15, We
On 2011-10-18 10:25, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 10:17:27AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> On 2011-10-18 09:58, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>>> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 03:15:29PM +0800, Wen Congyang wrote:
Hi, Jan Kiszka
At 10/10/2011 05:34 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
>>
At 10/18/2011 04:26 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
> On 2011-10-18 10:25, Wen Congyang wrote:
>> At 10/18/2011 04:19 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
>>> On 2011-10-18 09:58, Wen Congyang wrote:
At 10/18/2011 03:52 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
> On 2011-10-18 09:15, Wen Congyang wrote:
>> Hi, Jan Kiszka
>>
>
On 2011-10-18 10:25, Wen Congyang wrote:
> At 10/18/2011 04:19 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
>> On 2011-10-18 09:58, Wen Congyang wrote:
>>> At 10/18/2011 03:52 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
On 2011-10-18 09:15, Wen Congyang wrote:
> Hi, Jan Kiszka
>
> At 10/10/2011 05:34 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
>>>
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 10:17:27AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2011-10-18 09:58, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 03:15:29PM +0800, Wen Congyang wrote:
> >> Hi, Jan Kiszka
> >>
> >> At 10/10/2011 05:34 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
> >>> On 2011-10-10 11:02, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On 2011-10-18 10:17, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2011-10-18 09:58, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 03:15:29PM +0800, Wen Congyang wrote:
>>> Hi, Jan Kiszka
>>>
>>> At 10/10/2011 05:34 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
On 2011-10-10 11:02, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 10, 201
At 10/18/2011 04:19 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
> On 2011-10-18 09:58, Wen Congyang wrote:
>> At 10/18/2011 03:52 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
>>> On 2011-10-18 09:15, Wen Congyang wrote:
Hi, Jan Kiszka
At 10/10/2011 05:34 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
> On 2011-10-10 11:02, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On 2011-10-18 09:58, Wen Congyang wrote:
> At 10/18/2011 03:52 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
>> On 2011-10-18 09:15, Wen Congyang wrote:
>>> Hi, Jan Kiszka
>>>
>>> At 10/10/2011 05:34 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
On 2011-10-10 11:02, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 08:52:08AM +0200, J
On 2011-10-18 09:58, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 03:15:29PM +0800, Wen Congyang wrote:
>> Hi, Jan Kiszka
>>
>> At 10/10/2011 05:34 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
>>> On 2011-10-10 11:02, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 08:52:08AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>
>>>
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 03:15:29PM +0800, Wen Congyang wrote:
> Hi, Jan Kiszka
>
> At 10/10/2011 05:34 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
> > On 2011-10-10 11:02, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> >> On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 08:52:08AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>
> >
> > Run gdb with "set debug remote 1" and watch t
At 10/18/2011 03:52 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
> On 2011-10-18 09:15, Wen Congyang wrote:
>> Hi, Jan Kiszka
>>
>> At 10/10/2011 05:34 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
>>> On 2011-10-10 11:02, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 08:52:08AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Run gdb with "set deb
On 2011-10-18 09:15, Wen Congyang wrote:
> Hi, Jan Kiszka
>
> At 10/10/2011 05:34 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
>> On 2011-10-10 11:02, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>>> On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 08:52:08AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>
>>
>> Run gdb with "set debug remote 1" and watch the communication, it is no
Hi, Jan Kiszka
At 10/10/2011 05:34 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
> On 2011-10-10 11:02, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 08:52:08AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>
> Run gdb with "set debug remote 1" and watch the communication, it is not
> that complex. But a dump command is probably sim
At 10/11/2011 02:58 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
> On 2011-10-11 04:20, Wen Congyang wrote:
> The other reason why it would be good, is that we would then have a
> clearly
> defined standard "QEMU dump format", instead of "libvirt dump format for
> QEMU"
A core file would be th
On 2011-10-11 04:20, Wen Congyang wrote:
The other reason why it would be good, is that we would then have a clearly
defined standard "QEMU dump format", instead of "libvirt dump format for
QEMU"
>>>
>>> A core file would be that format - for direct gdb processing. No
>>> proprietar
At 10/10/2011 05:34 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
> On 2011-10-10 11:02, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> Run gdb with "set debug remote 1" and watch the communication, it is not
> that complex. But a dump command is probably simpler for those
> scenarios, I agree.
We have determined to introduce a new comman
At 10/10/2011 06:19 PM, Daniel P. Berrange Write:
> On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 11:34:44AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> On 2011-10-10 11:10, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>>> On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 10:08:26AM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 10:21:02AM +0800, Wen Congyang wrote
On 10/10/2011 01:04 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 12:48:52PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 10/10/2011 12:21 PM, Alon Levy wrote:
> >>A core file would be that format - for direct gdb processing. No
> >>proprietary re-inventions please.
> >
> >Just a note
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 12:48:52PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 10/10/2011 12:21 PM, Alon Levy wrote:
> >> A core file would be that format - for direct gdb processing. No
> >> proprietary re-inventions please.
> >
> >Just a note: A core file to windows core dump file would be nice for
> >win
On 10/10/2011 12:21 PM, Alon Levy wrote:
> A core file would be that format - for direct gdb processing. No
> proprietary re-inventions please.
Just a note: A core file to windows core dump file would be nice for
windows guest crashes.
That requires cooperation from a kernel driver in the Wi
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 11:34:44AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2011-10-10 11:10, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 10:08:26AM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> >> On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 10:21:02AM +0800, Wen Congyang wrote:
> >>> At 10/09/2011 06:23 PM, Richard W.M. Jones Wr
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 11:34:44AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2011-10-10 11:10, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 10:08:26AM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> >> On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 10:21:02AM +0800, Wen Congyang wrote:
> >>> At 10/09/2011 06:23 PM, Richard W.M. Jones Wr
On 2011-10-10 11:34, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 10:10:21AM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 10:08:26AM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>>> On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 10:21:02AM +0800, Wen Congyang wrote:
At 10/09/2011 06:23 PM, Richard W.M. Jon
On 2011-10-10 11:10, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 10:08:26AM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 10:21:02AM +0800, Wen Congyang wrote:
>>> At 10/09/2011 06:23 PM, Richard W.M. Jones Write:
On Sun, Oct 09, 2011 at 10:49:57AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 10:10:21AM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 10:08:26AM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 10:21:02AM +0800, Wen Congyang wrote:
> > > At 10/09/2011 06:23 PM, Richard W.M. Jones Write:
> > > > On Sun, Oct 09, 2011 at 10:49:5
On 2011-10-10 11:02, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 08:52:08AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> On 2011-10-10 04:21, Wen Congyang wrote:
>>> At 10/09/2011 06:23 PM, Richard W.M. Jones Write:
On Sun, Oct 09, 2011 at 10:49:57AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> As explained in the o
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 10:08:26AM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 10:21:02AM +0800, Wen Congyang wrote:
> > At 10/09/2011 06:23 PM, Richard W.M. Jones Write:
> > > On Sun, Oct 09, 2011 at 10:49:57AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> > >> As explained in the other replies: It is
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 10:21:02AM +0800, Wen Congyang wrote:
> At 10/09/2011 06:23 PM, Richard W.M. Jones Write:
> > On Sun, Oct 09, 2011 at 10:49:57AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >> As explained in the other replies: It is way more future-proof to use an
> >> interface for this which was designed
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 08:52:08AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2011-10-10 04:21, Wen Congyang wrote:
> > At 10/09/2011 06:23 PM, Richard W.M. Jones Write:
> >> On Sun, Oct 09, 2011 at 10:49:57AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >>> As explained in the other replies: It is way more future-proof to use a
On Fri, Oct 07, 2011 at 02:56:56PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2011-10-07 14:25, Wen Congyang wrote:
> > 于 2011/10/7 18:16, Jan Kiszka 写道:
> >> On 2011-10-07 11:46, Wen Congyang wrote:
> >>> Currently, virsh dump uses monitor command migrate to dump guest's memory
> >>> to file, and we can use cr
At 10/10/2011 03:48 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
> On 2011-10-10 09:47, Wen Congyang wrote:
>> At 10/10/2011 03:22 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
>>> On 2011-10-10 09:17, Wen Congyang wrote:
At 10/10/2011 03:01 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
> On 2011-10-10 08:59, Wen Congyang wrote:
>> At 10/10/2011 02:52 PM,
On 2011-10-10 09:47, Wen Congyang wrote:
> At 10/10/2011 03:22 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
>> On 2011-10-10 09:17, Wen Congyang wrote:
>>> At 10/10/2011 03:01 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
On 2011-10-10 08:59, Wen Congyang wrote:
> At 10/10/2011 02:52 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
>> On 2011-10-10 04:21, We
At 10/10/2011 03:22 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
> On 2011-10-10 09:17, Wen Congyang wrote:
>> At 10/10/2011 03:01 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
>>> On 2011-10-10 08:59, Wen Congyang wrote:
At 10/10/2011 02:52 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
> On 2011-10-10 04:21, Wen Congyang wrote:
>> At 10/09/2011 06:23 PM,
On 2011-10-10 09:17, Wen Congyang wrote:
> At 10/10/2011 03:01 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
>> On 2011-10-10 08:59, Wen Congyang wrote:
>>> At 10/10/2011 02:52 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
On 2011-10-10 04:21, Wen Congyang wrote:
> At 10/09/2011 06:23 PM, Richard W.M. Jones Write:
>> On Sun, Oct 09,
At 10/10/2011 03:01 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
> On 2011-10-10 08:59, Wen Congyang wrote:
>> At 10/10/2011 02:52 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
>>> On 2011-10-10 04:21, Wen Congyang wrote:
At 10/09/2011 06:23 PM, Richard W.M. Jones Write:
> On Sun, Oct 09, 2011 at 10:49:57AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>>
On 2011-10-10 09:08, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
> Am 10.10.2011 um 08:52 schrieb Jan Kiszka :
>
>> On 2011-10-10 04:21, Wen Congyang wrote:
>>> At 10/09/2011 06:23 PM, Richard W.M. Jones Write:
On Sun, Oct 09, 2011 at 10:49:57AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> As explained in the other replies:
Am 10.10.2011 um 08:52 schrieb Jan Kiszka :
> On 2011-10-10 04:21, Wen Congyang wrote:
>> At 10/09/2011 06:23 PM, Richard W.M. Jones Write:
>>> On Sun, Oct 09, 2011 at 10:49:57AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
As explained in the other replies: It is way more future-proof to use an
interface
On 2011-10-10 08:59, Wen Congyang wrote:
> At 10/10/2011 02:52 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
>> On 2011-10-10 04:21, Wen Congyang wrote:
>>> At 10/09/2011 06:23 PM, Richard W.M. Jones Write:
On Sun, Oct 09, 2011 at 10:49:57AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> As explained in the other replies: It is way
At 10/10/2011 02:52 PM, Jan Kiszka Write:
> On 2011-10-10 04:21, Wen Congyang wrote:
>> At 10/09/2011 06:23 PM, Richard W.M. Jones Write:
>>> On Sun, Oct 09, 2011 at 10:49:57AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
As explained in the other replies: It is way more future-proof to use an
interface for
On 2011-10-10 04:21, Wen Congyang wrote:
> At 10/09/2011 06:23 PM, Richard W.M. Jones Write:
>> On Sun, Oct 09, 2011 at 10:49:57AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>> As explained in the other replies: It is way more future-proof to use an
>>> interface for this which was designed for it (remote gdb) inst
At 10/09/2011 06:23 PM, Richard W.M. Jones Write:
> On Sun, Oct 09, 2011 at 10:49:57AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> As explained in the other replies: It is way more future-proof to use an
>> interface for this which was designed for it (remote gdb) instead of
>> artificially relaxing reasonable con
On 2011-10-09 12:23, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 09, 2011 at 10:49:57AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> As explained in the other replies: It is way more future-proof to use an
>> interface for this which was designed for it (remote gdb) instead of
>> artificially relaxing reasonable constr
On Sun, Oct 09, 2011 at 10:49:57AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> As explained in the other replies: It is way more future-proof to use an
> interface for this which was designed for it (remote gdb) instead of
> artificially relaxing reasonable constraints of the migration mechanism
> plus having to fo
On 2011-10-08 17:16, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 07, 2011 at 12:16:07PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> On 2011-10-07 11:46, Wen Congyang wrote:
>>> Currently, virsh dump uses monitor command migrate to dump guest's memory
>>> to file, and we can use crash to analyze the file.
>>>
>>> Unfor
On Fri, Oct 07, 2011 at 12:16:07PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2011-10-07 11:46, Wen Congyang wrote:
> > Currently, virsh dump uses monitor command migrate to dump guest's memory
> > to file, and we can use crash to analyze the file.
> >
> > Unfortunately, virsh dump can not work if guest uses h
On 2011-10-07 16:05, Wen Congyang wrote:
> 于 2011/10/7 20:56, Jan Kiszka 写道:
>> On 2011-10-07 14:25, Wen Congyang wrote:
>>> 于 2011/10/7 18:16, Jan Kiszka 写道:
On 2011-10-07 11:46, Wen Congyang wrote:
> Currently, virsh dump uses monitor command migrate to dump guest's memory
> to file,
于 2011/10/7 20:56, Jan Kiszka 写道:
On 2011-10-07 14:25, Wen Congyang wrote:
于 2011/10/7 18:16, Jan Kiszka 写道:
On 2011-10-07 11:46, Wen Congyang wrote:
Currently, virsh dump uses monitor command migrate to dump guest's memory
to file, and we can use crash to analyze the file.
Unfortunately, vir
On 2011-10-07 14:25, Wen Congyang wrote:
> 于 2011/10/7 18:16, Jan Kiszka 写道:
>> On 2011-10-07 11:46, Wen Congyang wrote:
>>> Currently, virsh dump uses monitor command migrate to dump guest's memory
>>> to file, and we can use crash to analyze the file.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately, virsh dump can not wor
于 2011/10/7 18:16, Jan Kiszka 写道:
On 2011-10-07 11:46, Wen Congyang wrote:
Currently, virsh dump uses monitor command migrate to dump guest's memory
to file, and we can use crash to analyze the file.
Unfortunately, virsh dump can not work if guest uses host pci device. The
reason is that the de
On 2011-10-07 11:46, Wen Congyang wrote:
> Currently, virsh dump uses monitor command migrate to dump guest's memory
> to file, and we can use crash to analyze the file.
>
> Unfortunately, virsh dump can not work if guest uses host pci device. The
> reason is that the device's status is also neede
Currently, virsh dump uses monitor command migrate to dump guest's memory
to file, and we can use crash to analyze the file.
Unfortunately, virsh dump can not work if guest uses host pci device. The
reason is that the device's status is also needed to migrate to remote machine,
and the host pci de
97 matches
Mail list logo
