|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-4.1.6.1] SIGSEGV libxc/xc_save_domain.c: p2m_size >> configured_ram_size
Hello Georg,
first of all thank you for answering.
Am 13.06.2016 um 12:15 schrieb George Dunlap:
> On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 4:22 PM, Philipp Hahn <hahn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> while trying to live migrate some VMs from an xen-4.1.6.1 host "xc_save"
>> crashes with a segmentation fault in tools/libxc/xc_domain_save.c:1141
>>> /*
>>> * Quick belt and braces sanity check.
>>> */
>>> for ( i = 0; i < dinfo->p2m_size; i++ )
>>> {
>>> mfn = pfn_to_mfn(i);
>>> if( (mfn != INVALID_P2M_ENTRY) && (mfn_to_pfn(mfn) != i) )
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> due to a de-reference through
>>> #define pfn_to_mfn(_pfn) \
>>> ((xen_pfn_t) ((dinfo->guest_width==8) \
>>> ? (((uint64_t *)ctx->live_p2m)[(_pfn)]) \
>>> : ((((uint32_t *)ctx->live_p2m)[(_pfn)]) == 0xffffffffU \
>>> ? (-1UL) : (((uint32_t *)ctx->live_p2m)[(_pfn)]))))
...
> Given that 4.1 is long out of support, we won't be making a proper fix
> in-tree (since it will never be released).
I know that 4.1 is EOL.
I'm aware of Ubuntu still having xen-4.1 in one of their LTS versions
(Precise) and its also in Debian-oldstable, which a lot people (us
included) still use. I would prefer to update, but I can for reasons
outside my direct control.
I'm already working with Stefan Bader from Canonical to backport most of
the XSAs to 4.1, so there already exists a "better" version outside of
the official Xen repositories.
> So what kind of resolution
> would be the most help to you? A patch you can apply locally to allow
> the save/restore to work?
A patch is okay. I've already fixed a lot other bugs in xen-4.1 by
patching the last release, so compiling my own version is no problem for me.
Philipp
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |