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/
Home Products Support Community News


[Xen-devel] Re: Recurring OOPS in latest -unstable kernel

To: Ian Pratt <m+Ian.Pratt@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Xen-devel] Re: Recurring OOPS in latest -unstable kernel
From: Kip Macy <kip.macy@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2005 13:28:45 -0700
Cc: xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ian Pratt <Ian.Pratt@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Sun, 03 Jul 2005 20:27:35 +0000
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=OdOHahhyTo0mkJW1QXnMdROwPNTdR1RHRk1RD29HCwTQZuouHtPVPiTAgn9Me3+/S5mzFcPAf+AIwGzL5YiMS7bex1O5AK2UY2O+N8iseohp6BrAaBOOU981+m+1LFFDknXYq8YId5peTLUh23GLy1vxehaptAOxZOfOTqfSHoY=
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <A95E2296287EAD4EB592B5DEEFCE0E9D2824C1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
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/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <A95E2296287EAD4EB592B5DEEFCE0E9D2824C1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: Kip Macy <kip.macy@xxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Just to clarify  - this is straight out of the -unstable tree from
yesterday with no CONFIG_REGPARM. Nonetheless, a few things are
# CONFIG_PREEMPT is not set

> The same code (in netback) works in 2.6.9rc2/2.6.11.x, so something
> screws up the ringbuffers -- should we start reviewing the path down
> from hypervisor_callback?
> Something strange seems to happen there with ringbuffer assignment to
> interfaces and I guess we need to review the upcall path.
> Somewhere, we may clobber an argument, possibly involving CONFIG_REGPARM
> ...
> I don't know the code well enough see it without adding a lot of
> instrumentation to the code.

Xen-devel mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>