Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-unstable test] 11946: regressions - FAIL

[Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, 2012-05-04 at 21:11 +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 04/05/12 20:48, AP wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx> 
> > wrote:
> >> On Tue, 2012-02-14 at 10:44 +0000, Ian Campbell wrote:
> >>> On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 20:16 +0000, xen.org wrote:
> >>>> flight 11946 xen-unstable real [real]
> >>>> http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~xensrcts/logs/11946/
> >>>>
> >>>> Regressions :-(
> >>>>
> >>>> Tests which did not succeed and are blocking,
> >>>> including tests which could not be run:
> >>>>  test-amd64-i386-xl-credit2    7 debian-install            fail REGR. 
> >>>> vs. 11944
> >>> Host crash:
> >>> http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~xensrcts/logs/11946/test-amd64-i386-xl-credit2/serial-woodlouse.log
> >>>
> >>> This is the debug Andrew Cooper added recently to track down the IRQ
> >>> assertion we've been seeing, sadly it looks like the debug code tries to
> >>> call xfree from interrupt context and therefore doesn't produce full
> >>> output :-(
> >> Are we still seeing the issue this debugging was intended to address? We
> >> don't seem to be seeing the host crashes any more. Should the debug code
> >> be patched up as in the following patch, otherwise when we do see it it
> >> doesn't end up printing any useful info.
> >>
> >> Someone recently reported bugs.debian.org/665433 to Debian, is this the
> >> same underlying issue? That report is with Xen 4.0 FWIW.
> > I saw the issue (xen-unstable 25256:9dda0efd8ce1) that the debugging
> > code added. Can the fix to the debugging code be checked in until the
> > original issue has been fixed?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > AP
> >
> > (XEN) *** IRQ BUG found ***
> > (XEN) CPU0 -Testing vector 236 from bitmap
> > 41,47,49,57,64,72,80,88,96,100,104,120,136,152,160-161,168,171,192,200-201,208
> > (XEN) Guest interrupt information:
> > (XEN)    IRQ:   0 affinity:01 vec:f0 type=IO-APIC-edge
> > status=00000000 mapped, unbound
> > (XEN) Assertion '!in_irq()' failed at xmalloc_tlsf.c:607
> > (XEN) ----[ Xen-4.2-unstable  x86_64  debug=y  Tainted:    C ]----
> > (XEN) CPU:    0
> > (XEN) RIP:    e008:[<ffff82c48012cefb>] xfree+0x33/0x118
> > (XEN) RFLAGS: 0000000000010002   CONTEXT: hypervisor
> > (XEN) rax: 0000000000000000   rbx: ffff830214ac0080   rcx: 0000000000000000
> > (XEN) rdx: ffff82c4802d8880   rsi: 0000000000000083   rdi: 0000000000000000
> > (XEN) rbp: ffff82c4802b7c78   rsp: ffff82c4802b7c58   r8:  0000000000000004
> > (XEN) r9:  0000000000000000   r10: 0000000000000000   r11: 0000000000000010
> > (XEN) r12: ffff830214ac0c80   r13: 000000000000000c   r14: ffff830214ac0ca8
> > (XEN) r15: 0000000000000000   cr0: 000000008005003b   cr4: 00000000000426f0
> > (XEN) cr3: 0000000168971000   cr2: 0000000001095e00
> > (XEN) ds: 002b   es: 002b   fs: 0000   gs: 0000   ss: e010   cs: e008
> > (XEN) Xen stack trace from rsp=ffff82c4802b7c58:
> > (XEN)    ffff830214ac0080 ffff830214ac0c80 000000000000000c ffff830214ac0ca8
> > (XEN)    ffff82c4802b7ce8 ffff82c4801664d4 ffff82c4802e214a ffff82c400000020
> > (XEN)    ffff82c4802b7cf8 0000000000000083 ffff830214ac00a8 0000000000000000
> > (XEN)    00000000000000ec 00000000000000ec ffff830214ac0c80 000000000000000c
> > (XEN)    ffff830214ac0ca8 ffff82c480302760 ffff82c4802b7d58 ffff82c480168000
> > (XEN)    ffff82c4802b7f18 ffff82c4802b7f18 000000ec00000000 ffff82c4802b7f18
> > (XEN)    0000000000000000 0000000000000000 ffff82c480302324 0000000000000020
> > (XEN)    ffff82c4802b7dd8 0000000000000003 0000000000000000 0000000000000000
> > (XEN)    ffff82c4802b7dc8 ffff82c4801683d3 ffff8300da991000 ffff8300da996000
> > (XEN)    0000000000000000 ffffffff802b7d90 ffff82c480159160 ffff82c4802b7e20
> > (XEN)    ffff82c48015d7db ffff82c4802b7f18 ffff8300da991000 0000000000000003
> > (XEN)    0000000000000000 0000000000000000 00007d3b7fd48207 ffff82c480160426
> > (XEN)    0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000003 ffff8300da991000
> > (XEN)    ffff82c4802b7ef8 ffff82c4802b7f18 0000000000000282 ffff82c4802319a0
> > (XEN)    00000000deadbeef 0000000000000000 ffff83021c0b8081 0000000000000000
> > (XEN)    0000000000000048 ffff8801d7227ec0 ffff8300da991000 0000002000000000
> > (XEN)    ffff82c4801865c1 000000000000e008 0000000000000202 ffff82c4802b7e88
> > (XEN)    000000000000e010 0000000000000003 ffff82c4802b7ef8 ffff82c4802230d8
> > (XEN)    ffff82c4802b7f18 0000000000000000 0000000000000246 ffffffff810013aa
> > (XEN)    0000000000000000 ffffffff810013aa 000000000000e030 0000000000000246
> > (XEN) Xen call trace:
> > (XEN)    [<ffff82c48012cefb>] xfree+0x33/0x118
> > (XEN)    [<ffff82c4801664d4>] dump_irqs+0x2a4/0x2e8
> > (XEN)    [<ffff82c480168000>] irq_move_cleanup_interrupt+0x29f/0x2db
> > (XEN)    [<ffff82c4801683d3>] do_IRQ+0x9e/0x5a4
> > (XEN)    [<ffff82c480160426>] common_interrupt+0x26/0x30
> > (XEN)    [<ffff82c4801865c1>] async_exception_cleanup+0x1/0x35a
> > (XEN)    [<ffff82c480228438>] syscall_enter+0xc8/0x122
> > (XEN)
> > (XEN)
> > (XEN) ****************************************
> > (XEN) Panic on CPU 0:
> > (XEN) Assertion '!in_irq()' failed at xmalloc_tlsf.c:607
> > (XEN) ****************************************
> > (XEN)
> > (XEN) Reboot in five seconds...
> The attached patch should prevent this panic

This is effectively the same as my patch from
<1332844592.25560.9.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>. I think "if (ssid)
xfree(...)" is preferable to "if (in_irq()) xfree(...)" but not enough
to prevent me:

Acked-by: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>

If the debug code is going to stay for 4.2 then IMHO we should also take
this patch to make it actually useful. Otherwise we should just revert
the original debug patch before the release.



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel