Hide Forgot
Created attachment 486181 [details] libvirtd logs when the failure occurred libvirtd logs when the failure occurred. Description of problem: After doing the a sequence of operations on a guest, for example, domain start, shutdown, start, destroy, suspend, resume, the guest always failed to save to a file. libvir: QEMU error : cannot send monitor command '{"execute":"stop"}': Connection reset by peer API error message: API Error:'cannot send monitor command \'{"execute":"stop"}\': Connection reset by peer', error code is 38 Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): libvirt-0.8.7-13.el6.x86_64 libvirt-python-0.8.7-13.el6.x86_64 qemu-kvm-0.12.1.2-2.150.el6.x86_64 kernel-2.6.32-120.el6.x86_64 How reproducible: always Steps to Reproduce: 1. do a serials of operation to guest 2. virsh save <guest> 3. Actual results: report errors as above Expected results: save operation succeeds Additional info: I attached libvirtd log to the bz.
Since RHEL 6.1 External Beta has begun, and this bug remains unresolved, it has been rejected as it is not proposed as exception or blocker. Red Hat invites you to ask your support representative to propose this request, if appropriate and relevant, in the next release of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.
libvir: QEMU error : cannot send monitor command '{"execute":"stop"}': Connection reset by peer API error message: API Error:'cannot send monitor command \'{"execute":"stop"}\': Connection reset by peer', error code is 38 This is not the exact error libvirt throws, what libvirt throws is: "cannot send monitor command '{"execute":"stop"}': Connection reset by peer", other parts are by QE's testing suite. And this problem could only be reproduced by QE's test suite on specified testing box.
Connection reset by peer is often an indication that qemu has crashed. Without further information, we will have to close this BZ as INSUFFICIENT_DATA. Is the problem still reproducible?
(In reply to comment #4) > Connection reset by peer is often an indication that qemu has crashed. Without > further information, we will have to close this BZ as INSUFFICIENT_DATA. Is > the problem still reproducible? Closing as INSUFFICIENT DATA; please reopen if the behavior reappears.