XCP-ng
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Register
    • Login
    1. Home
    2. Popular
    Log in to post
    • All Time
    • Day
    • Week
    • Month
    • All Topics
    • New Topics
    • Watched Topics
    • Unreplied Topics

    • All categories
    • stormiS

      XCP-ng 8.3 updates announcements and testing

      Watching Ignoring Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved News
      594
      1 Votes
      594 Posts
      297k Views
      stormiS
      @rzr said: As this is my first time installing these update candidates, Actually we moved first batch of packages that landed in testing to candidates repo, to avoid mix up in the second batch that just landed in testing repo. Since nothing new appeared in candidate you should probably already had them before, home this is clarifying what is actually happening Next yum update should just pull the latest stable versions? Not if you already have installed then from testing (or candidate) repo, because versions are same, it's only the distribution channel that change, no impact for testers. I'm not sure what you understood from @scarfantennae's question, but that we moved packages from xcp-ng-testing to xcp-ng-candidates doesn't seem on topic here. The question is: "now that I've applied this update candidates from the testing repositories, am I definitively in testing mode?". The answer is: no, because: The --enable-repo switch only applies to the two commands you ran: clearing the cache and applying updates. The repositories remain disabled by default, so yes, next time you update you'll only get stable updates if there are any. Either the exact packages that you installed will be pushed as official updates (in which case there will be nothing for you to do), or we'll push newer updates that will supersede them automatically next time you update. Hope it's clear.
    • jgraftonJ

      CPU pegged at 100% in several Rocky Linux 8 VMs without workload in guest

      Watching Ignoring Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Compute
      28
      0 Votes
      28 Posts
      4k Views
      jgraftonJ
      @laszlobortel Hehe yeah, those are pretty old kernels. I'd say there's a good chance kernel upgrades will go a long way to alleviating the CPU hangs. I can't say it's exclusively a problem with lvmohba storage, that's just what we use because of our previous VMware infrastructure was block storage over fiber channel. We knew a physical infra overhaul wasn't in the cards for us for this migration so we stayed with our existing storage system. This bug bit us half way through the migration until we figured out upgrading the kernel generally fixed it.
    • S

      unacceptable message conflict

      Watching Ignoring Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Backup
      8
      3
      0 Votes
      8 Posts
      213 Views
      S
      @pierrebrunet ticket created https://help.vates.tech/#ticket/zoom/59723
    • itservicesI

      XO Backup Error: VDI_IN_USE(OpaqueRef:.., destroy)

      Watching Ignoring Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Backup
      16
      2
      0 Votes
      16 Posts
      499 Views
      itservicesI
      Quick Update: Was looking good with commit cf26d. After the transfer completed the VDI of that particular VM was still in use, according to XO. So still failure on the job. Regards, Marc
    • P

      XO Lite - network management "coming soon"

      Watching Ignoring Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved XO Lite
      6
      1
      0 Votes
      6 Posts
      752 Views
      olivierlambertO
      The same as @john.c and also XO Lite tends to be less a priority because less critical than the full fledged XO (the priority is to replace entirely XO 5 in the next releases). Why you would need XO Lite outside basic actions? It's mostly meant to bootstrap XO itself and do basic operations (which is already the case, at least with many basic features already). Initially, the goal hasn't moved: replacing XenCenter. We are moving in that direction, but again, I think it's more important to get XO 6 finished first. I'm curious to understand more the use case of XO Lite in your context @unreal-shizzle ?
    • B

      VT-d, iommu, dmar failing - xen/qubesos troubleshooting - thinkpad e15 gen 2

      Watching Ignoring Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Hardware
      4
      0 Votes
      4 Posts
      111 Views
      poddingueP
      Good to hear, thanks a lot for your feedback.
    • B

      The Lowest Priority Bug Ever? (/etc/udev/rules.d/z10-xen-vcpu-hotplug.rules)

      Watching Ignoring Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved XCP-ng
      8
      0 Votes
      8 Posts
      664 Views
      TeddyAstieT
      The rule is oddly written, and may conflict with another similar one that already exist in the distro (hence may not be useful to begin with). The modern generic rule for doing vCPU hotplug is, which would be preferable to the current z10-xen-vcpu-hotplug.rules. ACTION=="add", SUBSYSTEM=="cpu", ATTR{online}=="0", ATTR{online}="1"
    • H

      Potential bug with Windows VM backup: "Body Timeout Error"

      Watching Ignoring Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Backup
      62
      3
      2 Votes
      62 Posts
      11k Views
      nikadeN
      @poddingue My colleage managed to workaround the issue by re-installing the lab on other hardware, I think it is now Cisco UCS-servers. It was HP ProLiant-servers before. Maybe it was an issue with some of the NIC or firmware, im not really sure, but it works now.
    • SuperDuckGuyS

      Unable to create XOSTOR volume

      Watching Ignoring Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved XOSTOR
      9
      1 Votes
      9 Posts
      604 Views
      poddingueP
      Thanks for coming back to close it out. That's useful to know. So I was plenty wrong, as it was the XOSTOR licensing backend rather than the repo side I guessed at; those -32000 errors really don't give much away. For anyone landing here later: sounds like -32000 on XOSTOR creation can come from either end, a licensing/entitlement issue that support sorts, or a host not reaching the package repo, so both are worth checking. @alcoralcor, did support get yours sorted too, or is yours still the repodata / repo-reachability one? Glad you're unblocked either way.
    • henri9813H

      Slow boot on rocky linux 10 latest kernel

      Watching Ignoring Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Compute
      25
      2
      0 Votes
      25 Posts
      724 Views
      henri9813H
      Hello, Thanks for all !
    • D

      Slow response between XCP-NG and cloud stack syncing

      Watching Ignoring Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Compute
      2
      0 Votes
      2 Posts
      66 Views
      olivierlambertO
      Hi, XCP-ng got an event system that will propagate things like this instantly, at least that's the way it works normally Do you have the same behaviour in Xen Orchestra? Have you reported the issue to CloudStack? If you have an XCP-ng support subscription, you can also open a ticket so we can take a look on XCP-ng status to catch any obvious issue.
    • T

      Xen 8.2 isos

      Watching Ignoring Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Off topic
      2
      0 Votes
      2 Posts
      40 Views
      TeddyAstieT
      @TrapoSAMA https://updates.xcp-ng.org/isos/8.2/ And https://updates.xcp-ng.org/8/8.2/ appears fine.
    • A

      Replication is leaving VDIs attached to Control Domain, again

      Watching Ignoring Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Backup
      11
      0 Votes
      11 Posts
      810 Views
      A
      @poddingue Since setting NBD=1, I have not seen the problem. SR is NFS on dual 40G ethernet with a TrueNAS scale 25.10 server using all NVMe SSD, so storage performance is as good as I can make it. I'll have to enable NBD=2 again to see if it still happens and if I can find the relevant part of the logs. As this is a random problem I can't recreate it on a normal test environment.
    • S

      XOA host got disconnected and cannot re-add with error connect ECONNREFUSED x.x.x.x:443

      Watching Ignoring Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Management
      2
      0 Votes
      2 Posts
      73 Views
      olivierlambertO
      Hi, IP conflict?
    • M

      xe sr-create ignores other-config:auto-scan=true during SR creation

      Watching Ignoring Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Compute
      4
      0 Votes
      4 Posts
      152 Views
      M
      @psafont Thanks for the quick response and clarification. I appreciate you opening a work item for this. Looking forward to seeing this improvement in a future release.
    • H

      Performing automated shutdown during a power failure using a USB-UPS with NUT - XCP-ng 8.2

      Watching Ignoring Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Compute
      33
      0 Votes
      33 Posts
      28k Views
      S
      For people running XCP-ng, wanting to use NUT client to power down gracefully during longer power outages, it could be interesting to note that Unifi now has two very affordable UPS models that feature a built in NUT server. So no need to run your own NUT server.
    • E

      TrueNAS VM failing to start

      Watching Ignoring Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Compute
      22
      0 Votes
      22 Posts
      2k Views
      E
      Wearing my best Lazarus cosplay outfit, I'll apologise for the resurrection. Today I had an issue with my UPS which caused me to reboot XCP a few times. During those reboots I had at least 2, maybe 3, re-occurrences of this where when TrueNAS was booting, XCP would lock up. Most of the time, after a power cycle of the server, the next boot would start TRUENAS cleanly. One time it took 2 power cycles before success. Unfortunately only one of the crashes resulted in a /var/crash report, but that did have the same symptoms as my original report: (XEN) [ 81.101362] Non-responding CPUs: {24-47} (XEN) [ 81.101363] (XEN) [ 81.101364] **************************************** (XEN) [ 81.101365] Panic on CPU 5: (XEN) [ 81.101366] FATAL TRAP: vec 2, NMI[0000] IN INTERRUPT CONTEXT (XEN) [ 81.101366] **************************************** (XEN) [ 81.101367] (XEN) [ 81.101368] Reboot in five seconds... (XEN) [ 81.101369] Executing kexec image on cpu5 (XEN) [ 82.101441] Failed to shoot down CPUs {24-47} Between my original report and today, I have rebooted other times, following updates, when this issue has not surfaced. Does anyone think this could be hardware related, despite all the memory testing and stress testing I did when I built the server and again after the original issue, all with no faults. Or have I just got an unlucky set of circumstances with some sort of race condition.
    • florentF

      Need FeedBack: New version of the File level restore

      Watching Ignoring Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Backup
      12
      2 Votes
      12 Posts
      455 Views
      florentF
      the new code is now in master
    • J

      Ghost PCI device - how to remove?

      Watching Ignoring Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Hardware
      4
      0 Votes
      4 Posts
      144 Views
      poddingueP
      That leftover NIC is probably a stale PIF that XAPI is still holding, even though the card is physically gone, and the Refresh button re-scans rather than removing it. The docs have proper "remove a physical NIC" steps that end in forgetting the old PIF with xe pif-forget: https://docs.xcp-ng.org/networking/#remove-a-physical-nic. For the GPU side, the PCI passthrough flow (hiding the device from dom0, then assigning it) is here: https://docs.xcp-ng.org/compute#detaching-a-pci-device. If the GPU still won't show up as assignable once the stale PIF is gone, it might be worth a mention to @Team-Hypervisor-Kernel.
    • R

      cifs-utils LPE (CVE-2026-46243) / 8.3 dom0 vulnerability inquiry

      Watching Ignoring Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved XCP-ng
      5
      0 Votes
      5 Posts
      408 Views
      R
      Closing the loop on this one — VSA-2026-021 went up yesterday (June 10) covering CIFSwitch / CVE-2026-46243: https://docs.vates.tech/security/advisories/2026/vates-sa-2026-021 A few things worth flagging for anyone following along: Severity landed at Moderate 🟠 — same ballpark as CopyFail/DirtyFrag, as Lucien anticipated. XCP-ng 8.3 and XOA both confirmed affected. XCP-ng 8.3 fix isn't in the main repo yet. The advisory notes there's a publicly available package with the fix, but it's not in the standard channel — Vates is asking people to reach out for the install procedure so you don't break future Rolling Pool Updates. So don't go hand-rolling the kernel commit yourself if you want to stay on the RPU path. XOA is already handled — fixed in Debian kernel 6.1.174-1, pushed via the unattended update mechanism. Just note the XOA VM needs a restart for it to take effect, and anything older than Debian 11/12 won't get the update and needs an OS upgrade first. Mitigation is unchanged from what we discussed: blacklist the cifs module if you're not using SMB-based SRs (which breaks SMB SRs, so only if you don't rely on them). Good turnaround given the disclosure-to-advisory window. Thanks again @LucienLassalle and the security team.