[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH][SPT][DISCUSS] BUG() in shadow.h delete_shadow_status() with HVM guest
Keir, we have been using this patch since May 8th on our internal trees, and haven't seen any negative consequences. Jun's patch below fixes a problem with a hang when performing an "xm destroy" on a windows guest. We would like to see it go into the xen-unstable.hg tree, and 3.0-testing if you feel comfortable with it. Thanks Tom Signed-off-by: Tom Woller <thomas.woller@xxxxxxx> diff -r 1e3977e029fd xen/arch/x86/shadow.c --- a/xen/arch/x86/shadow.c Mon May 8 18:21:41 2006 +++ b/xen/arch/x86/shadow.c Tue May 9 13:20:33 2006 @@ -3467,7 +3467,9 @@ } else { printk("For non HVM shadow, create_l1_shadow:%d\n", create_l2_shadow); } - shadow_update_min_max(l4e_get_pfn(sl4e), l3_table_offset(va)); + + if ( v->domain->arch.ops->guest_paging_levels == PAGING_L4 ) + shadow_update_min_max(l4e_get_pfn(sl4e), l3_table_offset(va)); > -----Original Message----- > From: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > [mailto:xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of > Woller, Thomas > Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 6:07 PM > To: Nakajima, Jun; xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH][SPT][DISCUSS] BUG() in > shadow.h delete_shadow_status() with HVM guest > > > I think this is a bit different because the hash key has > the index of > > the PDP for PAE guests. I guess somehow tlbflush_timestamp has been > > modified. Can you try this patch? > > Thanks for the reply and the fix - your patch was successful > on both SVM and VMX boxes. I tested 32bit PAE win2003 server > SE on SVM, and 32bit PAE Winxpsp2 on VMX. Both did not hit > the BUG() in shadow.h. > > We definitely don't have much priority with PAE here, might > be prudent to let this patch sit with your more extensive PAE > testing, including 32bit hv, etc. We'll use your patch > internally for a while, and indicate if we see an adverse > side-affects. > > So, unless you indicate otherwise, I'll defer to you to push > up when you feel it's a solid fix. > thanks > Tom > > > > diff -r 1e3977e029fd xen/arch/x86/shadow.c > > --- a/xen/arch/x86/shadow.c Mon May 8 18:21:41 2006 > > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/shadow.c Tue May 9 13:20:33 2006 > > @@ -3467,7 +3467,9 @@ > > } else { > > printk("For non HVM shadow, create_l1_shadow:%d\n", > > create_l2_shadow); > > } > > - shadow_update_min_max(l4e_get_pfn(sl4e), > > l3_table_offset(va)); > > + > > + if ( v->domain->arch.ops->guest_paging_levels == > PAGING_L4 ) > > + shadow_update_min_max(l4e_get_pfn(sl4e), > > l3_table_offset(va)); > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |