On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 04:34:00PM -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> >On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 11:32:14AM -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> >>Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> >>>I'll try upgrading from dom0/hackery to xen-tip/next and see how it works
> >>>for me.
> >It seems latest tree crashes for me (happened yesterday, and also today,
> >just rebuilt the latest commits):
> This is xen-tip/next? Does master work any better? How about running
> as domU?
Yep, it's xen-tip/next. I'll try xen-tip/master next..
> >Zone PFN ranges:
> > DMA 0x00000010 -> 0x00001000
> > Normal 0x00001000 -> 0x000229fe
> > HighMem 0x000229fe -> 0x00040000
> >Movable zone start PFN for each node
> >early_node_map active PFN ranges
> > 0: 0x00000010 -> 0x0000009f
> > 0: 0x00000100 -> 0x00001167
> > 0: 0x00001268 -> 0x00040000
> >(XEN) d0:v0: unhandled page fault (ec=0003)
> >(XEN) Pagetable walk from c1268000:
> >(XEN) L3[0x003] = 000000003c8f0001 000008f0
> >(XEN) L2[0x009] = 000000003d276067 00001276
> >(XEN) L1[0x068] = 000000003d268061 00001268
> >(XEN) domain_crash_sync called from entry.S (ff19f70e)
> >(XEN) Domain 0 (vcpu#0) crashed on cpu#0:
> >(XEN) ----[ Xen-3.3.1-11.fc11 x86_32p debug=n Not tainted ]----
> >(XEN) CPU: 0
> >(XEN) EIP: e019:[<c088adae>]
> >(XEN) EFLAGS: 00000206 EM: 1 CONTEXT: pv guest
> >(XEN) eax: 00000000 ebx: 00800000 ecx: 00200000 edx: c1268000
> >(XEN) esi: 01268000 edi: c1268000 ebp: c086de5c esp: c086de1c
> >(XEN) cr0: 8005003b cr4: 000006f0 cr3: 3c85c000 cr2: c1268000
> >(XEN) ds: e021 es: e021 fs: e021 gs: e021 ss: e021 cs: e019
> >(XEN) Guest stack trace from esp=c086de1c:
> >[root@dom0test linux-2.6-xen]# gdb ./vmlinux
> >(gdb) x/i 0xc086de1c
> >0xc086de1c <init_thread_union+3612>: add %al,(%eax)
> >32b PAE dom0, 32b PAE hypervisor.
> >>>Btw how does dom0 upstreaming look at the moment? Ingo sent pull request
> >>>about some changes, and those got merged, but how about the rest?
> >>Ingo basically ignored all the Xen changes in the leadup to the merge
> >>window, then stomped on my attempt to get them merged with Linus, which
> >>was all pretty annoying. It had the doubly-irritating side-effect of
> >>casting doubt over the controversy-free domU changes, so they didn't get
> >>merged in the merge window either; by the time Ingo got around to OKing
> >>them, the window had closed. So all that got merged in the end was the
> >>must-have bug fixes.
> >Yeah.. :( I really hope next merge window will be better..
> >>Linus isn't going to pull any more major functionality changes in the
> >>-rc kernels, and certainly isn't going to make an exception for Xen. So
> >>we're stuck with waiting for the .31 merge window.
> >I think it might be a good idea to start sending the patches already now,
> >they get enough review before the .31 merge window..
> >-- Pasi
> >Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel mailing list