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

RE: [Xen-devel] Current xen-unstable xen crashing in boot

To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx>, Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [Xen-devel] Current xen-unstable xen crashing in boot
From: "Wei, Gang" <gang.wei@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 20:03:57 +0800
Accept-language: en-US
Acceptlanguage: en-US
Cc: Xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 05:04:33 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <4A85D0F9.1080802@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: <4A85B8D0.7090206@xxxxxxxx> <4A85CDA0.2010905@xxxxxxxx> <4A85D0F9.1080802@xxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: AcodIphUH5UNO60nTS+p9nJ2y3rA6wAbw9gg
Thread-topic: [Xen-devel] Current xen-unstable xen crashing in boot
I used to meet similar problem before I do a clean build. The 
xen/arch/x86/xen.lds could not be regenerated without a clean build, which 
would cause __per_cpu_end still equal __per_cpu_start + (32 << 13).

Please confirm it is not caused by this factor.

Jimmy

Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> On 08/14/09 13:48, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>>> (XEN) Early fatal page fault at e008:ffff828c8015415c
> (cr2=ffff83007fc75008, ec=0000)
>>> (XEN) Stack dump: 000000000007fc76 000000000000000c
> ffff83007fc77ff0 ffff83007fc76000 ffff828c8026fe58
> 0000000000000262 0000000000000020 0180000000000000
> 000000000000010c ffff828c802a6380 ffff83007fc75008
> 0000000000000001 ffff830000000000 ffff828c80219b0c
> ffff83007fc76000 0000000000000000 ffff828c8015415c
> 000000000000e008 0000000000010082 ffff828c8026fdd8
> 0000000000000000 ffff828c80154158 ffff828c8026fde8
> 0000000000000262 00000000000002e2 0000000000000086
> 0000000000000262 0000000000000000 000000008026fe18
> ffff83007fc75008 ffff828c00000027 ffff83007fc76000
> ffff828c8021dd60 0000000000000002 000000007fc42000
> ffff83000008bfc0 ffff83000008bf40 0000000000002000
> ffff828c8026fe68 ffff828c80154f85 ffff828c8026fe78
> ffff828c80154fa5 ffff828c8026ff18 ffff828c802343ef
> 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000a1e000
> 0000000000aca3e0 ffff83000008bf40 0000000000000000
> 00000000ffffffff ffff83000000000c 0000000800000000
> 000000010000006e 0000000000000003 00000000000002f8
> 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000000
> 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000000
> 0000000000067e8c ffff828c801000b5 0000000000000000
> 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000000
> 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000000
> 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000000
> 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000000
> 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000000
> 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000000
> 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000000
> 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000000
> 0000000000000000 00000000fffff000
>>> 
>>> This appears to be:
>>> (gdb) x/i 0xffff828c8015415c
>>> 0xffff828c8015415c <map_pages_to_xen+112>:  mov    (%rax),%rax (gdb)
>>> x/i 0xffff828c80154f85 0xffff828c80154f85
>>> <__memguard_change_range+237>:      leaveq 
>>> 
>>> but I can't find a good enclosing frame from there (is
> there a tool to pretty-print these stack traces?).
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> I bisected it down to:
>> 
>> The first bad revision is:
>> changeset:   20038:1197585e32b7
>> user:        Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> date:        Fri Aug 07 17:29:50 2009 +0100
>> summary:     x86: Increase default max CPUs to 64.
>> 
> 
> Reverting this change on current tip works fine for me.
> 
>    J
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel