Re: [Xen-devel] Different esps

[Jacob Gorm Hansen <jacob@xxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 2004-01-20 at 18:08, Steven Hand wrote:

> The __cli() should certainly prevent any events from being delivered. 
> 
> It's tricky to work out what the above means as you've clearly hacked 
> Xen to e.g print "fault_in_hypervisor 2" (is 2 the error_code? is 
> there any reason you've added this stuff in place of the regular code 
> in do_trap() or do_page_fault()?). Can you post the code/diffs for 
> these parts of xen? 

I added this because there otherwise Xen will just kill the domain silently, 
unless there is a debugging option I have overlooked.

about line 329 in traps.c:

  fault_in_hypervisor:
+       printk("fault_in_hypervisor 2\n");
+       printk("dom %d : esp1 %08lx, ss %08lx\n",current->domain, 
current->thread.esp1, current->thread.ss1);
+
+       execution_context_t ctxt;
+    memcpy(&ctxt,
+           get_execution_context(), 
+           sizeof(execution_context_t));
+
+       printk("eip %p esp %p eip %p  addr %p flags %x\n", ctxt.eip, ctxt.esp, 
gtb->eip, addr, ctxt.eflags);


> 
> What is at 0xc3a91ff8? Have you actually taken a page fault? I note 
> that zero eips are not so good -- but OTOH I don't know what those
> values you print actually are [partic given there are two eips]... 
> plus if we're really multiply faulting in the hypervisor, all bets
> may well be off... 

0xc3a91ff8 appears to be where ctxt.esp is pointing if you push some
values. The dual 0 eips worry me as well, I have not registered any
event-callbacks for the domain, perhaps that is the reason? But should I
not be allowed to run without registering for interrupts in a brand-new
domain? To me this looks like an interrupt-delivery gone bad.

cheers,
Jacob