WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

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/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] Error with NFS and XEN (High network load)

To: Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Error with NFS and XEN (High network load)
From: Roberto Gonzalez Azevedo <rgonzalez@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 00:41:44 -0300
Cc: Xen Development Mailing List <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Wed, 16 Aug 2006 20:42:20 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20060816160423.GA32653@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
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: <44E25187.5030003@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20060816160423.GA32653@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.5 (X11/20060719)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Thanks !!! Now it's working !!! Dom0 and DomU don't crash anymore !!!
Please, report it on Xen Bugzilla id # 735.


Thanks !
- ----------------------------
Roberto Gonzalez Azevedo


Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 10:58:15PM +0000, Roberto Gonzalez Azevedo wrote:
>> On domU machine:
>> root@domU:# mount -t nfs real-machine-not-xen-or-any-virtual:/mnt /data
>> [ok]
>>
>> Crash:
>> root@domU:# time dd if=/dev/zero of=/data/test.txt bs=16k count=16384
>> [NOT OK]
> 
> Thanks for the report.  This is what I needed to reproduce the problem.
> I forgot to initialise the first fragment to a proper value in the first
> SG patch.
> 
> [NET] back: Initialise first fragment properly
> 
> The first fragment is used to store the pending_idx of the leading
> txreq if it doesn't fit in the head area.  When it does fit into
> the head we need to ensure that the first fragment contains a value
> that is not equal to pending_idx as that's what we use to distinguish
> between the two cases in a a number of places.
> 
> This patch sets the first fragment to ~0 which is not equal to any
> valid pending_idx.  Without this initialisation, we may double-free
> a pending_idx if the first fragment happened to contain a value
> equal to it (this usually happened with pending_idx 0).
> 
> Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> Cheers,
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFE4+V4F+EMwkXLsEwRAkrbAKCdhygwo/Hh+oyDgaS3I0z0B6IzlwCggmok
vcxKwacM/yKnhdpChmlIQPI=
=SrQT
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

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

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