Hmmm....
I tried something a bit more dramatic. In arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c, in the
case HVM_PARAM_TIMER_MODE, I changed the "goto param_fail;" to
"panic("BAD HVMPTM");" and added "timer_mode=6" in the config file, but
the panic was not triggered. But the same code/config change in
xen-unstable DOES panic.
Am I missing something in configuring this for xen-3.1-testing? Or
perhaps the 3.1 patch just isn't passing timer_mode down properly?
Thanks,
Dan
> -----Original Message-----
> From: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Keir Fraser
> Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2007 4:08 PM
> To: dan.magenheimer@xxxxxxxxxx; xen-devel
> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] 3.1.x and 3.2.x releases
>
>
> I only did a straightforward port of the xend parts, without
> much testing.
> You could add tracing to the hvm_param hypercall in
> xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c,
> and see whether the timer mode is being set for your HVM
> guest that way.
>
> -- Keir
>
> On 26/12/07 19:53, "Dan Magenheimer"
> <dan.magenheimer@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Thanks Keir... but in trying to test this, I find that
> timer_mode seems to be
> > displayed in sxp debug output in xend.log for xen-unstable,
> but I don't see
> > sxp output for timer_mode in xend.log for xen-3.1-testing
> (cset 15564). Does
> > timer_mode get properly set and passed down to xen in
> xen-3.1-testing simply
> > by adding a (e.g.) "timer_mode=3" line in the config file?
> If so, is there
> > another way I can verify that?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Dan
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> [mailto:xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of
> Keir Fraser
> >> Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2007 3:26 AM
> >> To: dan.magenheimer@xxxxxxxxxx; xen-devel
> >> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] 3.1.x and 3.2.x releases
> >>
> >>
> >> Done.
> >>
> >> K.
> >>
> >>
> >> On 19/12/07 17:22, "Dan Magenheimer"
> >> <dan.magenheimer@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Any chance the sequence of timer/tick fixes that you,
> Dave Winchell,
> >>> Ben Guthro, Haitao Shan, and Eddie Dong were discussing/developing
> >>> over the last two months could get into 3.1.3? Clocks that
> >> gain time
> >>> can cause some pretty nasty difficult-to-diagnose real customer
> >>> problems.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Dan
> >>>
> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >>>> [mailto:xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of
> >> Keir Fraser
> >>>> Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 9:01 AM
> >>>> To: xen-devel
> >>>> Subject: [Xen-devel] 3.1.x and 3.2.x releases
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Folks,
> >>>>
> >>>> A new release candidate for 3.2.0 has just been checked into the
> >>>> xen-unstable tree. It's available from staging and will be in
> >>>> the main tree
> >>>> when it has passed internal regression tests.
> >>>>
> >>>> Meanwhile, in preparation for 3.1.3, please let me know if
> >>>> there are any
> >>>> further patches from xen-unstable that should be backported
> >>>> into the 3.1
> >>>> branch. You can pull the xen-3.1-testing.hg repository to
> >> see what has
> >>>> already been backported.
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>>> Keir
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> Xen-devel mailing list
> >>>> Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >>>> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Xen-devel mailing list
> >>> Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >>> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Xen-devel mailing list
> >> Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
> >>
> >
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
>
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
Home