From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751521AbaC1HIJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Mar 2014 03:08:09 -0400 Received: from isrv.corpit.ru ([86.62.121.231]:60122 "EHLO isrv.corpit.ru" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750946AbaC1HIH (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Mar 2014 03:08:07 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 425 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 03:08:07 EDT Message-ID: <53351E2C.3070508@msgid.tls.msk.ru> Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 11:01:00 +0400 From: Michael Tokarev Organization: Telecom Service, JSC User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20131103 Icedove/17.0.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alejandro Comisario CC: Stefan Hajnoczi , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, "Michael S. Tsirkin" , ghammer@redhat.com, Jason Wang , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Markus Armbruster Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Massive read only kvm guests when backing file was missing References: <20140327064158.GA17563@redhat.com> <87y4zwt7mu.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org> <20140327081040.GA21756@redhat.com> <20140327085347.GB9580@stefanha-thinkpad.redhat.com> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1 OpenPGP: id=804465C5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 27.03.2014 20:14, Alejandro Comisario wrote: > Seems like virtio (kvm 1.0) doesnt expose timeout on the guest side > (ubuntu 12.04 on host and guest). > So, how can i adjust the tinmeout on the guest ? After a bit more talks on IRC yesterday, it turned out that the situation is _much_ more "interesting" than originally described. The OP claims to have 10500 guests running off an NFS server, and that after NFS server downtime, the "backing files" were disappeared (whatever it means), so they had to restore those files. More, the OP didn't even bother to look at the guest's dmesg, being busy rebooting all 10500 guests. > This solution is the most logical one, but i cannot apply it! > thanks for all the responses! I suggested the OP to actually describe the _real_ situation, instead of giving random half-pictures, and actually take a look at the actual problem as reported in various places (most importantly the guest kernel log), and reoirt _those_ hints to the list. I also mentioned that, at least for some NFS servers, if a client has a file open on the server, and this file is deleted, the server will report error to the client when client tries to access that file, and this has nothing at all to do with timeouts of any kind. Thanks, /mjt