Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756185AbZGFHnj (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Jul 2009 03:43:39 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751649AbZGFHnb (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Jul 2009 03:43:31 -0400 Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:34747 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750877AbZGFHna (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Jul 2009 03:43:30 -0400 Message-ID: <4A51AB17.5050404@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 06 Jul 2009 09:43:19 +0200 From: Gerd Hoffmann User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1b3pre) Gecko/20090513 Fedora/3.0-2.3.beta2.fc11 Lightning/1.0pre Thunderbird/3.0b2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu CC: Christoph Hellwig , Paolo Bonzini , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jeremy Fitzhardinge Subject: Re: [PATCH] xen: wait up to 5 minutes for device connection References: <1246626771-11345-1-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com> <20090703160046.GA4262@infradead.org> <4A4E765F.4000501@redhat.com> <15093.1246720530@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> In-Reply-To: <15093.1246720530@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1616 Lines: 36 On 07/04/09 17:15, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote: > On Fri, 03 Jul 2009 23:21:35 +0200, Gerd Hoffmann said: > >> Usually it is *much* faster, but when the host is quite loaded it can >> take a unusual long time. With 10 seconds it happends in practice now >> and then that a virtual machine fails to boot just because the virtual >> root disk didn't show up fast enough. > > Are people actually trying to boot a guest on a host machine so loaded that > disks take that long to show up - and expect things to work in any sane > matter? Even on machines which can handle their load just fine under normal circumstances you may see that behavior in case of load peaks. Booting a bunch of virtual machines at the same time can trigger it for example. > I'm tempted to suggest that booting under conditions like that is almost > deserving of its own kernel Tainted flag. If devices aren't showing up in > a timely manner, we probably need to be leery of any other kernel timeout > values as well... It is pointless to taint just because of a unusual delay at some random point in time. A virtual machine can see higher delays due to load peaks on the host anytime. The flag wouldn't carry any useful information. You could add TAINT_VIRT to flag *all* vm guests, but as the boot log gives you that information already it is pointless too IMHO. cheers, Gerd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/