| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-devel
[Xen-devel] Re: [bisected] 2.6.31 regression: fails to boot as xen guest
|
To: |
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx> |
|
Subject: |
[Xen-devel] Re: [bisected] 2.6.31 regression: fails to boot as xen guest |
|
From: |
Pekka Enberg <penberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Date: |
Tue, 25 Aug 2009 21:14:32 +0300 |
|
Cc: |
"xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Arnd Hannemann <hannemann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, LKML <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "hannes@xxxxxxxxxxx" <hannes@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Arnd Hannemann <Arnd.Hannemann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> |
|
Delivery-date: |
Tue, 25 Aug 2009 11:14:56 -0700 |
|
Envelope-to: |
www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|
In-reply-to: |
<4A94283C.6000405@xxxxxxxx> |
|
List-help: |
<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help> |
|
List-id: |
Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com> |
|
List-post: |
<mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com> |
|
List-subscribe: |
<http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe> |
|
List-unsubscribe: |
<http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe> |
|
References: |
<4A9407B1.6020400@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <84144f020908250929t7d4a74f1n4827de04e5c4c56a@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4A94161A.2020609@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1251219129.4852.1.camel@penberg-laptop> <4A94283C.6000405@xxxxxxxx> |
|
Sender: |
xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
On Tue, 2009-08-25 at 11:06 -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> On 08/25/09 09:52, Pekka Enberg wrote:
> > Hi Arnd,
> >
> > On Tue, 2009-08-25 at 18:49 +0200, Arnd Hannemann wrote:
> >
> >>> Thanks for doing the bisect! Can we also see your .config also?
> >>>
> >> Config for -rc7 is attached. My bisect configs were based on that
> >>
> > Thanks! While we wait for the Xen people, you can try the following
> > patch to see if we can narrow the bug down to trap_init().
> >
>
> I think there's a problem that the side-effect of this change is that
> interrupt initialization comes later, and so the dynamically allocated
> arrays are not set up when the first interrupt comes in.
Which interrupt initialization is that? We call trap_init() _earlier_
now.
> However, this particular change shouldn't have any effect on interrupts
> being enabled early, right?
Yeah, interrupt enabling should not be affected.
Pekka
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
|
|
| |
|
Home