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] Question regarding SLAB corruption

To: Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Question regarding SLAB corruption
From: Lukas Hejtmanek <xhejtman@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2007 19:11:03 +0200
Cc: Roland Dreier <rdreier@xxxxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 10:08:01 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <C2B81D26.121E4%keir@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
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: <20070709153908.GM3885@xxxxxxxxxxx> <C2B81D26.121E4%keir@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-11)
On Mon, Jul 09, 2007 at 05:13:10PM +0100, Keir Fraser wrote:
> >> You definitely need the patch that I posted. If it won't apply cleanly to
> >> your kernel tree then you'll have to manually apply it, or move to the
> >> current 'unstable' linux-2.6.18-xen.hg tree.
> > 
> > Yeah, it solved the oops, thanks! However, I got another oops in 
> > __sync_single
> > because host addr is invalid.
> > 
> > I suppose, it is because in sync_single it picks up invalid line from the
> > io_tlb_orig_addr. It uses index 3332 which is not inserted by map_page.
> > The invalid address is 0x0021d1242de00000 but it is strange because I added
> > memset to zero io_tlb_orig_addr at the beginning, however, such address is
> > still there even if the index were not inserted by the map_page.
> 
> Nothing should read from an io_tlb_orig_addr[] slot that hasn't been
> initialised by map_single(). That's because sync_single() is only valid to
> be called on a memory region that was previously map_single()d. So what
> you're seeing is rather odd.

Well, it looks like that __sync_single is called on the first page that has
been allocated in the order 6 batch. So, are you saying that this is something
incorrect?

Because >0 orders do not pass through map_single(), if I understand correctly.

-- 
Lukáš Hejtmánek

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

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