Re: [Xen-devel] upgrade to 2.6.18.8 ?

[Stefan Berger <stefanb@xxxxxxxxxx>]

xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote on 10/03/2007
07:41:36 AM:

> On 10/3/07, Stefan Berger <stefanb@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > I was wondering whether we could apply the 2.6.18.8 patch to
the linux tree?
> > Assuming that that patch makes 2.6.18 better...
> >
> > It should be fairly simple. Only two hunks dont apply (both in
> > net/core/skbuff.c) and those changes seem to already have been
applied
> > anyway.
> 
> I have been running 2.6.18.8 with Xen-3.1.0/Xen-3.1.1-rc1/Xen3.1.1-rc2
> and the patch series I just exclude
> net-gso-6-linear-segmentation.patch.  The only problem I encountered
> is anything larger than 512MB in domainU might have such error:
> 
> Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel: ------------[ cut here ]------------
> Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel: kernel BUG at
> /usr/src/xen-3.1.1-rc1-src/linux-2.6.18.8-xen/arch/i386/mm/hypervisor.c:167!
> Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel: invalid opcode: 0000 [#1]
> Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel: SMP
> Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel: Modules linked in: ipv6 xt_state xt_tcpudp
> iptable_nat ip_nat iptable_mangle ip_conntrack_ftp ip_conntrack_irc
> ip_conntrack nfnetlink ipt_REJECT ipt_LOG iptable_filter ip_tables
> x_tables dm_mirror dm_mod
> Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel: CPU:    0
> Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel: EIP:    0061:[<c0114f1e>]
   Not tainted VLI
> Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel: EFLAGS: 00010282   (2.6.18.8-xenU
#3)
> Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel: EIP is at xen_pgd_pin+0x6e/0x80
> Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel: eax: ffffffea   ebx: eb243ed8  
ecx:
> 00000001   edx: 00000000
> Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel: esi: 00007ff0   edi: 00000000  
ebp:
> ebef3000   esp: eb243ed8
> Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel: ds: 007b   es: 007b   ss: 0069
> Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel: Process nagios (pid: 22284, ti=eb242000
> task=eaa5f550 task.ti=eb242000)
> Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX su(pam_unix)[22112]: session closed for user XXXXX
> Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel: Stack: 00000002 00043233 2cdb0000 0059b600
> ec126b80 c010f90f ec126bd0 c010f952
> Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel:        ec79e7ac 00000000
c011c15c ecbecd48
> ebf6d800 c029de68 ed6037f4 ec126bb4
> Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel:        ebef30c0 ebef34a0
eb243fbc bf92b960
> 00000011 00000000 ebef3000 ec2ddb40
> Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel: Call Trace:
> Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel:  [<c010f90f>] __pgd_pin+0x2f/0x40
> Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel:  [<c010f952>] mm_pin+0x32/0x50
> Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel:  [<c011c15c>] copy_process+0x101c/0x11c0
> Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel:  [<c029de68>] sock_wfree+0x38/0x40
> Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel:  [<c011c5fd>] do_fork+0x7d/0x1f0
> Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel:  [<c022aa7e>] evtchn_do_upcall+0xbe/0x100
> Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel:  [<c0102f0c>] sys_fork+0x2c/0x30
> Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel:  [<c0105127>] syscall_call+0x7/0xb
> Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel: Code: d2 be f0 7f 00 00 e8 42 c4 fe ff
85
> c0 78 1c 8b 5c 24 0c 8b 74 24 10 83 c4 14 c3 66 90 39 c2 72 c5 0f
0b
> 22 00 d8 fb 31 c0 eb bb <0f> 0b a7 00 44 17 32 c0 eb da 90 8d
b4 26 00
> 00 00 00 89 c2 83
> Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel: EIP: [<c0114f1e>] xen_pgd_pin+0x6e/0x80
> SS:ESP 0069:eb243ed8
> 
> I didn't try on 2.6.18 on domainU more than 512MB though so can't
> really comment on whether this is just happening to kernel 2.6.18.8.

Do you know how to trigger this error? I tried a rather
simple 2.6.18.8 domain(CS 217 + 2.6.18.8 patch with those 2 hunks cut out)
with 256 MB and then 728 MB and needless to say it does not appear there.

> 
> Sorry if this is out topic.

No, it's not. :-) 

   Stefan

> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Kindest regards,
> Giam Teck Choon
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel