-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 On 15.03.2012 19:53, Guido Günther wrote: > Hi Stefan, On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 07:08:47PM +0100, Stefan Bader wrote: >> Package: libvirt Version: 0.9.8-2 Severity: normal Tags: patch User: >> [email protected] Usertags: origin-ubuntu precise >> ubuntu-patch >> >> Dear Maintainer, >> >> libvirt uses xend (xm stack) to manage Xen instances. Even when using any >> emulated NIC, there will always be a paravirt NIC in parallel if the >> pci-platform device is present. Newer guests will unplug the emulated NIC >> on boot. However there is a bug in the stack that will cause the paravirt >> NIC to have no MAC address when "type=ioemu" is used in the vif >> definition. On the other hand, even without this keyword, the emulated >> NIC will be provided. >> >> Current libvirt already has a quirk to drop this when using no specific >> NIC model (defaulting to rtl8139). But the problem exists as well when >> using any other emulated NIC. >> >> So currently, when booting a 3.0+ kernel after setting up the instance >> with the default NIC model, everything works. Changing the model to >> something like e1000, then the guest cannot use the paravirt interface >> after unplugging the emulated one. Ending up with no network. >> >> *** /tmp/tmpay_5Gn/bug_body In Ubuntu, the attached patch was applied to >> achieve the following: >> >> The parch replicates the quirk used to prevent the usage of "type=ioemu" >> to be used for the case of using a NIC model name explicitely. I think it >> should be useful/working for Debian as well. Sorry if this is not the >> ideal justification. Since this is the first time I use submittodebian, I >> am not sure how this exactly should be done. >> >> >> [ Stefan Bader ] * Never use type=ioemu for NIC definitions. It is not >> needed and actually breaks the paravirt interface which always gets >> created in parallel. > > What's the upstream status of this issue? Please push this upstream > directly - this doesn't look like anything debian specific. -- Guido
I just sent it to upstream, too. Not sure about that outcome. I just thought, the problem must exist for Debian, too. And in case this becomes an issue, you could have the same adjustment. - -Stefan -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJPYxe8AAoJEOhnXe7L7s6j8GQP/jPTjGb86+6BCDngji39hJvb 6H2zrh++RZCbshkPvqLRM3GcKYO4zVSOTeYLvJPeLfzH94PU5JqRb1mgyUhCNlBG iEPQ8VVEbJ9R/L2rEZvmUqzomX+xS+qfcNfWRSE8iNFvUtUFVqSl8i3Jyus6uAiP 1aqTu5bcQa5petaYaTi7C5WZU3zIEZzwo7kLeSeTer+kuTzcIQ8spy+KszxI4jox 3ri0N/64YdnJZDZqOsz2zyJPdqF9c0sTIrCgM4Vl42c33VuRjFztXCHZ/Ay8em0L qmpWIqijRuQN2KVf2TXJBsy4dAMLB2tbKM++5/iBFnxpBL8hnjtE/7Ba8u/drJhA F0BD1zzLAO0CNSwbh6mCFeeIk3LuOMcLlUrlCecYVvGHbj8Z0kRf8igIUIo63Btc 2j5jDRCZMmhk2iviubL0J4rGqkkbZUtGHTvdeESiUXhfSJlMqJnfPRVsc1u8WnPH 0Y2DS+2wNSBWIbwbyRH5E1ULQvytQ3AbaK0pQ5J5TNxxYRCKGwDgR2/tFeHigda3 x6yTz7li8y245SBIVZB3+5TyhnoSLAC6jQZhAygHfVNsh2rdQUMvpb6nmygxVrMr oYj/jKv8622/yE9OW3c7P49RiP1L3Ip+WfZG5Hjw8GW8pCp56dUsJkiMCdTxo+h/ q9np3NVHywnV0X3kV5D7 =ZnSn -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
