WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

[Xen-devel] RE: A shadow bug?

To: "Tim Deegan" <Tim.Deegan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Xen-devel] RE: A shadow bug?
From: "Li, Xin B" <xin.b.li@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2006 19:31:22 +0800
Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Tue, 14 Nov 2006 03:31:42 -0800
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
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/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: AccH2g8GJtGalr4JQ/Cjuyzsk1cGoQABkmKw
Thread-topic: A shadow bug?
>
>At 16:49 +0800 on 14 Nov (1163522982), Li, Xin B wrote:
>> Hi Tim,
>> I'm running OLTP on x86_64 SMP FC5 HVM guest, but I saw this 
>messages on
>> guest console:
>> 
>> mysqld: Corrupted page table at address 2aaaae717000
>> PGD 33ae0067 PUD 33ae1067 PMD 2ea4c067 PTE 0
>> Bad pagetable: 000f [1] SMP
>
>Ah; it looks like x86_64 linux doesn't handle spurious 
>reserved-bit page
>faults.  Does this patch fix things for you?
>
>diff -r 032578b83641 xen/arch/x86/mm/shadow/multi.c
>--- a/xen/arch/x86/mm/shadow/multi.c    Tue Nov 14 10:39:49 2006 +0000
>+++ b/xen/arch/x86/mm/shadow/multi.c    Tue Nov 14 10:43:08 2006 +0000
>@@ -2623,6 +2623,10 @@ static int sh_page_fault(struct vcpu *v,
>              * Fall through to the normal fault handing logic */
>             perfc_incrc(shadow_fault_fast_fail);
>             SHADOW_PRINTK("fast path false alarm!\n");
>+            /* Don't pass the reserved-bit bit: if we look at 
>the fault 
>+             * below and decide to pass it to the guest, the 
>reserved-bit
>+             * bit won't make sense there. */
>+            regs->error_code &= ~PFEC_reserved_bit;
>         }
>     }
> #endif /* SHOPT_FAST_FAULT_PATH */
>
>

Yes, it's fixed.
thanks
-Xin

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • [Xen-devel] RE: A shadow bug?, Li, Xin B <=