On 19/01/2017 12:59, Fabian Grünbichler wrote:
> > I'm not sure how to fix it, unfortunately. :(
>
> so this means either use non-transparent huge pages when using
> scsi-block (haven't verified but should work?), or use aggressive THP
> settings and/or always leave enough memory reserves? :-/
On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 05:30:17PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>
> On 18/01/2017 17:19, Fabian Grünbichler wrote:
> > Jan 18 17:07:51 ubuntu kernel: sd 2:0:0:0: [sda] tag#109 FAILED Result:
> > hostbyte=DID_OK driverbyte=DRIVER_SENSE
> > Jan 18 17:07:51 ubuntu kernel: sd 2:0:0:0: [sda]
> Paolo Bonzini hat am 18. Januar 2017 um 17:30
> geschrieben:
>
>
>
>
> On 18/01/2017 17:19, Fabian Grünbichler wrote:
> > Jan 18 17:07:51 ubuntu kernel: sd 2:0:0:0: [sda] tag#109 FAILED Result:
> > hostbyte=DID_OK driverbyte=DRIVER_SENSE
> > Jan 18 17:07:51 ubuntu
On 18/01/2017 17:19, Fabian Grünbichler wrote:
> Jan 18 17:07:51 ubuntu kernel: sd 2:0:0:0: [sda] tag#109 FAILED Result:
> hostbyte=DID_OK driverbyte=DRIVER_SENSE
> Jan 18 17:07:51 ubuntu kernel: sd 2:0:0:0: [sda] tag#109 Sense Key : Illegal
> Request [current]
> Jan 18 17:07:51 ubuntu kernel:
On 17/01/2017 16:03, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 17/01/2017 12:22, Fabian Grünbichler wrote:
>> 6) repeat 3-5 until md5sum does not match, kernel spews error
>> messages, or you are convinced that everything is OK
>>
>> sample kernel message (for ext3):
>> Jan 17 11:39:32 ubuntu kernel: sd 2:0:0:0:
On 17/01/2017 16:03, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>
> On 17/01/2017 12:22, Fabian Grünbichler wrote:
>> 6) repeat 3-5 until md5sum does not match, kernel spews error
>> messages, or you are convinced that everything is OK
>>
>> sample kernel message (for ext3):
>> Jan 17 11:39:32 ubuntu kernel: sd
On 17/01/2017 12:22, Fabian Grünbichler wrote:
> 6) repeat 3-5 until md5sum does not match, kernel spews error
> messages, or you are convinced that everything is OK
>
> sample kernel message (for ext3):
> Jan 17 11:39:32 ubuntu kernel: sd 2:0:0:0: [sda] tag#32 FAILED Result:
> hostbyte=DID_OK
On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 11:41:44AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>
> On 17/01/2017 09:03, Fabian Grünbichler wrote:
> > Commit 8fdc7839e40f43a426bc7e858cf1dbfe315a3804 (first included in
> > 2.7.0)[1] changed the behaviour of scsi-block passthrough. Previously
> > this worked with SATA disks,
On 17/01/2017 09:03, Fabian Grünbichler wrote:
> Commit 8fdc7839e40f43a426bc7e858cf1dbfe315a3804 (first included in
> 2.7.0)[1] changed the behaviour of scsi-block passthrough. Previously
> this worked with SATA disks, now it doesn't anymore. A bisect run
> confirmed this, scsi-block with a SATA
Am 17.01.2017 um 07:40 schrieb Fam Zheng:
On Fri, 01/13 11:44, Peter Lieven wrote:
Hi,
i currently facing a problem in our testing environment where I see file
system corruption with 2.7.1 on iSCSI and Local Storage (LVM).
Trying to bisect, but has anyone observed this before?
The information
On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 08:33:46AM +0100, Alexandre DERUMIER wrote:
> Hi,
>
> proxmox users have reported recently corruption with qemu 2.7 and scsi-block
> (with passing physical /dev/sdX to virtio-scsi).
>
> working fine with qemu 2.6.
>
> qemu 2.7 + scsi-hd works fine
>
>
11 matches
Mail list logo