Re: [Xen-devel] xend segfaults when starting

On Wed, 2010-08-18 at 17:02 +0100, Christoph Egger wrote:
> 
> > > hcall_buf itself has the address 0x7f7ffdfe7000.
> > >
> > > hcall_buf->buf has the address 0x7f7ffdfe7040.
> >
> > That's very odd -- hcall_buf->buf is allocated with xc_memalign and
> > therefore should be page aligned. Are you sure the addresses aren't
> the
> > other way round?
> 
> Yes, I am. 

Then NetBSD has a bug where it apparently returns non-page aligned
allocations from valloc.

> Calling _xc_clean_hcall_buf() unconditionally and hcall_buf_prep()
> conditionally sounds to me like calling free() unconditionally
> and malloc() conditionally.

Not quite because (in the updated patch) _xc_clean_hcall_buf()
effectively contains a check to see if hcall_buf_prep() has been called.
IOW it is OK for the same reason free(NULL) is OK.

> Is it possible that xend can call xc_interface_close() during startup
> and hcall_buf_prep() later when xend comes in interaction with xm ?

Yes, but this is safe.

Ian.




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

<Prev in Thread]

Current Thread

[Next in Thread>

Previous by Date:

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] libxc: free thread specific hypercall buffer on xc_interface_close, Ian Campbell

Next by Date:

Re: [Xen-devel] Latest xen-unstable and issues building/using it, Gianni Tedesco

Previous by Thread:

Re: [Xen-devel] xend segfaults when starting, Christoph Egger

Next by Thread:

Re: [Xen-devel] xend segfaults when starting, Gianni Tedesco

Indexes:

[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]