On 9/6/11 1:13 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> So .. just to confirm this b/c you have been seeing this for some time. Did you
> see this with a 2.6.32 DomU? Asking b/c in 2.6.37 we removed some code:

2.6.32 was NOT affected and our problems began right around 2.6.37. 
This looks promising!

> It would really neat if the issue you have been hitting was exactly this
> and just having you revert the ef691947d8a3d479e67652312783aedcf629320a
> would fix it.

Reverted, built, deployed, and set as default.  We shall see!

Thanks,
-Chris