From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Junjie Wei <junjie.wei@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: VM save/restore
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 16:58:06 -0400
Message-ID: <5032A4DE.5040307@oracle.com>
References: <CC54F704.3C5C9%keir.xen@gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <CC54F704.3C5C9%keir.xen@gmail.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Keir Fraser <keir.xen@gmail.com>
Cc: xen-devel@lists.xen.org
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 08/18/2012 02:38 AM, Keir Fraser wrote:
>> It was caused by a hard-coded limit in tools/libxc/xc_domain_save.c:
>>
>> if ( info.max_vcpu_id >= 64 )
>> {
>>        ERROR("Too many VCPUS in guest!");
>>        goto out;
>> }
>>
>> And also in tools/libxc/xc_domain_restore.c:
>>
>> case XC_SAVE_ID_VCPU_INFO:
>>        buf->new_ctxt_format = 1;
>>        if ( RDEXACT(fd, &buf->max_vcpu_id, sizeof(buf->max_vcpu_id)) ||
>>            buf->max_vcpu_id >= 64 || RDEXACT(fd, &buf->vcpumap,
>>                                              sizeof(uint64_t)) ) {
>>            PERROR("Error when reading max_vcpu_id");
>>            return -1;
>>        }
>>
>> The code above is in both xen-4.1.2 and xen-unstable.
>>
>> I think if a VM can be successfully started, then save/restore should
>> also work. So I made a patch and did some testing.
>
> The check for 64 VCPUs is to cover the fact we only save/restore a 64-bit
> vcpumap. That would need fixing too surely, ot CPUs > 64 would be offline
> after restore I would imagine.
>
> And what is a PVM guest?
>
>   -- Keir
>

Paravirtualization / modified kernel. Am I using the wrong term "PVM"?

Thanks,
Junjie