linux-kernel - Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH]: Expand Xen blkfront for

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 19 Aug 2008 08:52:52 +0200
From:	Chris Lalancette <clalance@...hat.com>
To:	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
CC:	"xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com" <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH]: Expand Xen blkfront for > 16 xvd

Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> Chris Lalancette wrote:
>> Jeremy,
>>      Until recently, the maximum number of xvd block devices you could attach to
>> a Xen domU was 16.  This limitation turned out to be problematic for some users,
>> so it was expanded to handle a much larger number of disks.  However, this
>> requires a couple of changes in the way that blkfront scans for disks.  This
>> functionality is already present in the Xen linux-2.6.18-xen.hg tree; the
>> attached patch adds this functionality to the mainline xen-blkfront
>> implementation.
> 
> I haven't tested this yet.  You have tested it OK with some pvops
> kernel?  If so, send it to Jens Axboe with my ack.

Yes, I tested it with a 2.6.25-something Fedora 9 pv-ops kernel (i386).  I'll
send it along to Jens.

> 
>>   I successfully tested it on a 2.6.25 tree.  I build tested it
>> on 2.6.27-rc3, but couldn't get that tree to boot due to some other bug.
> 
> What other bug?

This is http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459067, that I think you've
already looked at.  Basically any F-10 or upstream git kernel is crashing on an
i386 RHEL-5 HV.  We were a little confused by your comment in that bug, however;
we were under the impression that the fix you mentioned was specifically a
32-on-64 fix, not for 32-on-32.  If we were wrong, please point it out.

Thanks,
Chris Lalancette
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/