Re: [Xen-devel] reboot driver domain, vifX.Y = NO-CARRIER?

Hi Jason, On Sun, May 6, 2018 at 11:45 AM, Jason Cooper wrote: > Hi Marek, > > On Sat, May 05, 2018 at 01:03:15AM +0200, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote: >> On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 06:13:25PM -0400, Rich Persaud wrote: >> > > On May 1, 2018, at 08:53, Jason Cooper

Re: [Xen-devel] reboot driver domain, vifX.Y = NO-CARRIER?

Hi Marek, On Sat, May 05, 2018 at 01:03:15AM +0200, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote: > On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 06:13:25PM -0400, Rich Persaud wrote: > > > On May 1, 2018, at 08:53, Jason Cooper wrote: > > > > > > add the link to xen-users thread of me talking to myself.

Re: [Xen-devel] reboot driver domain, vifX.Y = NO-CARRIER?

On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 06:13:25PM -0400, Rich Persaud wrote: > > On May 1, 2018, at 08:53, Jason Cooper wrote: > > > > add the link to xen-users thread of me talking to myself. :-)) > > > >> On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 12:37:51PM +, Jason Cooper wrote: > >> When I was

Re: [Xen-devel] reboot driver domain, vifX.Y = NO-CARRIER?

> On May 1, 2018, at 08:53, Jason Cooper wrote: > > add the link to xen-users thread of me talking to myself. :-)) > >> On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 12:37:51PM +, Jason Cooper wrote: >> When I was first digging into this, I started a thread on xen-users [1], >> I've

Re: [Xen-devel] reboot driver domain, vifX.Y = NO-CARRIER?

add the link to xen-users thread of me talking to myself. :-)) On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 12:37:51PM +, Jason Cooper wrote: > When I was first digging into this, I started a thread on xen-users [1], > I've attached my xl-reboot.sh script here so you can see exactly what > I'm attempting to do:

Re: [Xen-devel] reboot driver domain, vifX.Y = NO-CARRIER?

per <x...@lakedaemon.net> wrote: > >> > On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 04:22:30PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > >> >> Wei Liu writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] reboot driver domain, vifX.Y = > >> >> NO-CARRIER?"): > >> >> > To implement reuse_

Re: [Xen-devel] reboot driver domain, vifX.Y = NO-CARRIER?

On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 04:16:09PM +, Jason Cooper wrote: > Hi Ian, > > On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 04:22:30PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > > Wei Liu writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] reboot driver domain, vifX.Y = > > NO-CARRIER?"): > > > To implement reuse_domid i

Re: [Xen-devel] reboot driver domain, vifX.Y = NO-CARRIER?

On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 05:27:29PM +, Jason Cooper wrote: > Hi Wei Liu, > > On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 05:58:17PM +0100, Wei Liu wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 04:14:16PM +, Jason Cooper wrote: > > > On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 04:52:57PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote: > ... > > > >

Re: [Xen-devel] reboot driver domain, vifX.Y = NO-CARRIER?

On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 06:14:15PM +, Jason Cooper wrote: > On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 05:26:38PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > > Jason Cooper writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] reboot driver domain, vifX.Y = > > NO-CARRIER?"): > > > On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 0

Re: [Xen-devel] reboot driver domain, vifX.Y = NO-CARRIER?

30, 2018 at 04:22:30PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > > >> Wei Liu writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] reboot driver domain, vifX.Y = > > >> NO-CARRIER?"): > > >> > To implement reuse_domid in a sane way, either the toolstack needs to > > >> >

Re: [Xen-devel] reboot driver domain, vifX.Y = NO-CARRIER?

Hi George, On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 05:38:55PM +0100, George Dunlap wrote: > On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 5:16 PM, Jason Cooper <x...@lakedaemon.net> wrote: > > Hi Ian, > > > > On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 04:22:30PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > >> Wei Liu writes (&

Re: [Xen-devel] reboot driver domain, vifX.Y = NO-CARRIER?

On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 05:26:38PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > Jason Cooper writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] reboot driver domain, vifX.Y = > NO-CARRIER?"): > > On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 04:22:30PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: ... > > Ok, so I'm new to the guts of Xe

Re: [Xen-devel] reboot driver domain, vifX.Y = NO-CARRIER?

On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 5:16 PM, Jason Cooper <x...@lakedaemon.net> wrote: > Hi Ian, > > On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 04:22:30PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: >> Wei Liu writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] reboot driver domain, vifX.Y = >> NO-CARRIER?"): >> >

Re: [Xen-devel] reboot driver domain, vifX.Y = NO-CARRIER?

Jason Cooper writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] reboot driver domain, vifX.Y = NO-CARRIER?"): > On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 04:22:30PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > > Wei Liu writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] reboot driver domain, vifX.Y = > > NO-CARRIER?"): > > > To

Re: [Xen-devel] reboot driver domain, vifX.Y = NO-CARRIER?

Hi Ian, On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 04:22:30PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > Wei Liu writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] reboot driver domain, vifX.Y = NO-CARRIER?"): > > To implement reuse_domid in a sane way, either the toolstack needs to > > manage all domids and always sets d

Re: [Xen-devel] reboot driver domain, vifX.Y = NO-CARRIER?

Wei Liu writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] reboot driver domain, vifX.Y = NO-CARRIER?"): > To implement reuse_domid in a sane way, either the toolstack needs to > manage all domids and always sets domid when creating domain or the > hypervisor needs to cooperate -- to have interface

Re: [Xen-devel] reboot driver domain, vifX.Y = NO-CARRIER?

Hi Wei Liu, On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 05:58:17PM +0100, Wei Liu wrote: > On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 04:14:16PM +, Jason Cooper wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 04:52:57PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote: ... > > > xc_domain_create() takes a domid value by pointer.  Passing a value > > > other than

Re: [Xen-devel] reboot driver domain, vifX.Y = NO-CARRIER?

On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 06:02:46PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 27/04/18 17:14, Jason Cooper wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 04:52:57PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote: > >> On 27/04/18 16:35, Jason Cooper wrote: > >>> On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 04:11:39PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On

Re: [Xen-devel] reboot driver domain, vifX.Y = NO-CARRIER?

On 27/04/18 17:14, Jason Cooper wrote: > On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 04:52:57PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote: >> On 27/04/18 16:35, Jason Cooper wrote: >>> On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 04:11:39PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote: On 27/04/18 16:03, Jason Cooper wrote: > The problem occurs when I reboot a

Re: [Xen-devel] reboot driver domain, vifX.Y = NO-CARRIER?

On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 04:14:16PM +, Jason Cooper wrote: > On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 04:52:57PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote: > > On 27/04/18 16:35, Jason Cooper wrote: > > > On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 04:11:39PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote: > > >> On 27/04/18 16:03, Jason Cooper wrote: > > >>> The

Re: [Xen-devel] reboot driver domain, vifX.Y = NO-CARRIER?

On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 04:52:57PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 27/04/18 16:35, Jason Cooper wrote: > > Hi Andrew, > > > > On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 04:11:39PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote: > >> On 27/04/18 16:03, Jason Cooper wrote: > >>> The problem occurs when I reboot a driver domain.

Re: [Xen-devel] reboot driver domain, vifX.Y = NO-CARRIER?

On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 04:52:57PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 27/04/18 16:35, Jason Cooper wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 04:11:39PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote: > >> On 27/04/18 16:03, Jason Cooper wrote: > >>> The problem occurs when I reboot a driver domain. Regardless of the > >>>

Re: [Xen-devel] reboot driver domain, vifX.Y = NO-CARRIER?

Hi Andrew, On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 04:11:39PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 27/04/18 16:03, Jason Cooper wrote: > > The problem occurs when I reboot a driver domain. Regardless of the > > type of guest attached to it, I'm unable to re-establish connectivity > > between the driver domain and

Re: [Xen-devel] reboot driver domain, vifX.Y = NO-CARRIER?

On 27/04/18 16:03, Jason Cooper wrote: > All, > > On Gentoo Xen 4.9.1, I've been creating minimal Linux DomU's to create a > virtual, segregated network infrastructure. This has been going really > well, and I'm slowly progressing toward a self-updating system. > > My main snag has to do with