> -----Original Message----- > From: Jan Beulich [mailto:jbeul...@suse.com] > Sent: 06 July 2015 11:03 > To: Don Slutz > Cc: Paul Durrant; xen-devel@lists.xen.org > Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Migration bug added by commit > 2df1aa01bef7366798248ac6d03cfb42048b003d > > >>> On 29.06.15 at 17:14, <don.sl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 06/29/15 10:03, Paul Durrant wrote: > >> I think this patch should do it for now: > >> > >> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/emulate.c b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/emulate.c > >> index a4d7225..cc6130c 100644 > >> --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/emulate.c > >> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/emulate.c > >> @@ -183,7 +183,7 @@ static int hvmemul_do_io( > >> else > >> { > >> rc = hvm_send_assist_req(s, &p); > >> - if ( rc != X86EMUL_RETRY ) > >> + if ( rc != X86EMUL_RETRY || curr->domain->is_shutting_down ) > > > > I do not know enough about "is_shutting_down" to agree. What is clear > > is that > > this test is not the same as "!vcpu_start_shutdown_deferral(curr)". > > Together with Paul's reply the main question appears to have > remained un-answered: Does the patch suggested by Paul address > the problem you observed? >
I can at least say that the patch definitely resolved a regression seen in automated testing of migration of Windows Server 2003 VMs on XenServer. Paul > Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
