Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/1] Xen ARINC 653 Scheduler (updated to add support for CPU pools)

[Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I've just built latest xen-unstable.hg and linux-2.6.18-xen.hg and booted a
domU just fine. All my builds are 64-bit though whereas yours are 32-bit. I
suppose that could cause a difference (in particular, 32-bit hypervisor is
less tested by people).

 -- Keir

On 23/06/2010 22:16, "Kathy Hadley" <Kathy.Hadley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Keir,
>   I see this same behavior when I run the credit scheduler.  It doesn't
> look like it's localized to the scheduler I'm working on.  I pulled the
> latest code from http://xenbits.xensource.com/linux-2.6.18-xen.hg and
> rebuilt the kernel earlier today, with no effect.
> 
>   Note that I can successfully start the domain with Xen-3.4.1 and
> Xen-4.0.0, using the same configuration file as I am using with
> xen-unstable.
> 
> Kathy
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Keir Fraser [mailto:keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2010 4:23 PM
>> To: Kathy Hadley; George Dunlap
>> Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/1] Xen ARINC 653 Scheduler (updated
>> to add support for CPU pools)
>> 
>> On 23/06/2010 20:57, "Kathy Hadley" <Kathy.Hadley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Call Trace:
>>>   [<c01013a7>] hypercall_page+0x3a7  <--
>>>   [<c0109005>] raw_safe_halt+0xa5
>>>   [<c0104789>] xen_idle+0x49
>>>   [<c010482d>] cpu_idle+0x8d
>>>   [<c0404895>] start_kernel+0x3f5
>>>   [<c04041d0>] do_early_param+0x80
>>> 
>>>   Does this shed any light on the situation?
>> 
>> Looks like you're in the idle loop. So, no, it doesn't really shed
> much
>> useful light.
>> 
>>  -- Keir
>> 
> 



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel