[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [Xen-users] boot a existing windows in hvm domain


  • To: "Keir Fraser" <keir@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • From: "Brady Chen" <chenchp@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2007 17:38:36 +0800
  • Cc: tygrawy@xxxxxxxxx, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Z24 <z24@xxxxxxx>, AL.LINUX@xxxxxxxxxxx
  • Delivery-date: Wed, 08 Aug 2007 02:36:07 -0700
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=koXC2RgZLfa5UXidErkMjqMLFgtNlSe3Thk51ZGBke02NBcbDk1XIJ4PkoxZHN79zvuRScyX6ZvazFj5OJwM0OR9A+1aoiiow1trAg2qC06dRXDngoHQogIIqgKD5dqdcipyLhfzopKJ6JIYub3caucAgcvMPcV/eLeddVvbpug=
  • List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>

Thanks,
can you show me a way to dump bytes around 0xd680 ~ 0xd780?
just printf in trap() of vmxassist?

On 8/8/07, Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> You could give that a try, but really it shouldn't be going at
> 0xc0000-0x100000 at all. There are usually ROM images residing there.
>
> This is more likely to be a mis-emulation. Can you get a dump of the bytes
> around 0xd680-0xd780? Then we could try and work out what the guest is
> trying to execute, and see whether emulation is going wrong. A register dump
> from the guest (dump_regs()) at the start of every call to opcode() might
> also be useful.
>
>  -- Keir
>
> On 8/8/07 09:25, "Brady Chen" <chenchp@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Hi Keir,
> > I think the 7th issue I mentioned is the root cause,
> > so I have a question.
> > For real mode simulation, the simulator is running in the same space
> > with the codes to-be-simulated? then how to protect simulator from
> > being modified by to-be-simulated code?
> >
> > can I change the address of vmxassist to a higher address? just try to
> > give more space to the to-be-simulated windows.
> >
> > On 8/8/07, Brady Chen <chenchp@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> it's possible.
> >> any ideas to trace the function stack of xen guest? like "bt" command in 
> >> gdb.
> >>
> >> I did some analysis:
> >> 1. the call flow is opcode()->fetch8()->address()
> >> 2. only the printf in address() will change the behaver of crash.
> >> 3. and the crash EIP (0xD0800) is in the address() from the objdump.
> >> 4. the address() will be invoked more then 40, 000 times in one
> >> simulation, before the crash.
> >> 5. seems there are no recursive invoking in opcode(), fetch8(), address()
> >> 6. from the output of "xen dmesg", before the crash, a instructions
> >> sequence is simulated several times (you could check the  previous
> >> mails i send for "xen dmesg" output)
> >> 7. before the trap, the simulated instruction is "movw %ax, *0xD07FE",
> >> and the "*0xD07FE" is just the address of address(), (you could get
> >> the objdump output from previous mails too), so i think it's the
> >> simulation which crash the memory of address().
> >>
> >> On 8/8/07, Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>> Stack corruption/overflow, possibly?
> >>>
> >>>  K.
> >>>
> >>> On 7/8/07 17:06, "Brady Chen" <chenchp@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Yes, the printfs are the only changes. once I remove these prints, the
> >>>> trap comes back, with the same EIP (D0800)
> >>>>
> >>>> I tried to keep the first two printfs, the trap comes with different
> >>>> EIP(D19FD)
> >>>> static unsigned
> >>>> address(struct regs *regs, unsigned seg, unsigned off)
> >>>> {
> >>>>         uint64_t gdt_phys_base;
> >>>>         unsigned long long entry;
> >>>>         unsigned seg_base, seg_limit;
> >>>>         unsigned entry_low, entry_high;
> >>>>
> >>>>         printf("f 1\n");
> >>>>         if (seg == 0) {
> >>>>                 if (mode == VM86_REAL || mode == VM86_REAL_TO_PROTECTED)
> >>>>                         return off;
> >>>>                 else
> >>>>                         panic("segment is zero, but not in real 
> >>>> mode!\n");
> >>>>         }
> >>>>
> >>>>         printf("f 2\n");
> >>>>
> >>>> xen dmesg output:
> >>>> (XEN) HVM3: 0x0000D71F: 0xD00:0x071F (0) opc 0x83
> >>>> (XEN) HVM3: f 1
> >>>> (XEN) HVM3: f 2
> >>>> (XEN) HVM3: 0x0000D71F: 0xD00:0x071F (0) external interrupt 8
> >>>> (XEN) HVM3: f 1
> >>>> (XEN) HVM3: f 1
> >>>> (XEN) HVM3: f 1
> >>>> (XEN) HVM3: Trap (0x6) while in real mode
> >>>> (XEN) HVM3: eax        CFAE ecx           0 edx           0 ebx       
> >>>> D75B4
> >>>> (XEN) HVM3: esp       D7564 ebp       D75A0 esi         71F edi          
> >>>>  8
> >>>> (XEN) HVM3: trapno        6 errno         0
> >>>> (XEN) HVM3: eip       D19FD cs           10 eflags    13046
> >>>> (XEN) HVM3: uesp       CFAE uss           0
> >>>> (XEN) HVM3: ves       D4C44 vds           8 vfs          83 vgs         
> >>>> 71F
> >>>> (XEN) HVM3: cr0       50032 cr2           0 cr3           0 cr4         
> >>>> 651
> >>>> (XEN) HVM3:
> >>>> (XEN) HVM3: Halt called from %eip 0xD037C
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> and the objdump shows that:
> >>>> 000d1970 <interrupt>:
> >>>>    d1970:       55                      push   %ebp
> >>>>    d1971:       89 e5                   mov    %esp,%ebp
> >>>>    d1973:       57                      push   %edi
> >>>>    d1974:       89 d7                   mov    %edx,%edi
> >>>>    d1976:       56                      push   %esi
> >>>>   ....
> >>>>    d19f8:       66 89 30                mov    %si,(%eax)
> >>>>    d19fb:       31 d2                   xor    %edx,%edx
> >>>>    d19fd:       8d 34 bd 00 00 00 00    lea    0x0(,%edi,4),%esi
> >>>>    d1a04:       81 63 30 ff fd ff ff    andl   $0xfffffdff,0x30(%ebx)
> >>>>    d1a0b:       89 d8                   mov    %ebx,%eax
> >>>>    d1a0d:       89 34 24                mov    %esi,(%esp)
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On 8/7/07, Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>>> Very weird. The emulations now aren't at the same address as before 
> >>>>> either
> >>>>> (0xd4c3 rather than 0xd71b). Is the *only* difference that you added 
> >>>>> these
> >>>>> printf()s -- is it at all possible that the guest is executing down a
> >>>>> different path here for other reasons? If it's really down to the
> >>>>> printf()s
> >>>>> then I guess you'll have to shuffle/remove printf()s to get the old
> >>>>> behaviour back.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>  -- Keir
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 7/8/07 12:35, "Brady Chen" <chenchp@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> it's strange:
> >>>>>> if i add these prints, i get " Unknown opcode", not "trap".
> >>>>>> ===added printf
> >>>>>> [root@localhost firmware]# hg diff -p  vmxassist/vm86.c
> >>>>>> diff -r 6f18f5bdeea3 tools/firmware/vmxassist/vm86.c
> >>>>>> --- a/tools/firmware/vmxassist/vm86.c   Mon Aug 06 15:33:42 2007 +0100
> >>>>>> +++ b/tools/firmware/vmxassist/vm86.c   Tue Aug 07 19:33:55 2007 +0800
> >>>>>> @@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ static struct regs saved_rm_regs;
> >>>>>>  static struct regs saved_rm_regs;
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>  #ifdef DEBUG
> >>>>>> -int traceset = 0;
> >>>>>> +int traceset = ~0;
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>  char *states[] = {
> >>>>>>         "<VM86_REAL>",
> >>>>>> @@ -128,6 +128,7 @@ address(struct regs *regs, unsigned seg,
> >>>>>>         unsigned seg_base, seg_limit;
> >>>>>>         unsigned entry_low, entry_high;
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> +       printf("f 1\n");
> >>>>>>         if (seg == 0) {
> >>>>>>                 if (mode == VM86_REAL || mode == 
> >>>>>> VM86_REAL_TO_PROTECTED)
> >>>>>>                         return off;
> >>>>>> @@ -135,12 +136,16 @@ address(struct regs *regs, unsigned seg,
> >>>>>>                         panic("segment is zero, but not in real
> >>>>>> mode!\n");
> >>>>>>         }
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> +       printf("f 2\n");
> >>>>>>         if (mode == VM86_REAL || seg > oldctx.gdtr_limit ||
> >>>>>>                 (mode == VM86_REAL_TO_PROTECTED && regs->cs == seg))
> >>>>>>                 return ((seg & 0xFFFF) << 4) + off;
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> +       printf("f 3\n");
> >>>>>>         gdt_phys_base = guest_linear_to_phys(oldctx.gdtr_base);
> >>>>>> +       printf("f 4\n");
> >>>>>>         if (gdt_phys_base != (uint32_t)gdt_phys_base) {
> >>>>>> +               printf("f 5\n");
> >>>>>>                 printf("gdt base address above 4G\n");
> >>>>>>                 cpuid_addr_value(gdt_phys_base + 8 * (seg >> 3), 
> >>>>>> &entry);
> >>>>>>         } else
> >>>>>> @@ -152,14 +157,17 @@ address(struct regs *regs, unsigned seg,
> >>>>>>         seg_base  = (entry_high & 0xFF000000) | ((entry >> 16) &
> >>>>>> 0xFFFFFF);
> >>>>>>         seg_limit = (entry_high & 0xF0000) | (entry_low & 0xFFFF);
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> +       printf("f 6\n");
> >>>>>>         if (entry_high & 0x8000 &&
> >>>>>>                 ((entry_high & 0x800000 && off >> 12 <= seg_limit) ||
> >>>>>>                 (!(entry_high & 0x800000) && off <= seg_limit)))
> >>>>>>                 return seg_base + off;
> >>>>>> +       printf("f 7\n");
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>         panic("should never reach here in function address():\n\t"
> >>>>>>                   "entry=0x%08x%08x, mode=%d, seg=0x%08x,
> >>>>>> offset=0x%08x\n",
> >>>>>>                   entry_high, entry_low, mode, seg, off);
> >>>>>> +       printf("f 8\n");
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>         return 0;
> >>>>>>  }
> >>>>>> @@ -286,6 +294,7 @@ fetch8(struct regs *regs)
> >>>>>>         unsigned addr = address(regs, regs->cs, MASK16(regs->eip));
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>         regs->eip++;
> >>>>>> +       printf("f 9\n");
> >>>>>>         return read8(addr);
> >>>>>>  }
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> ===output when add many printf
> >>>>>> (XEN) HVM12: 0x0000D4C3: 0xD00:0x04C3 (0) addr32addr32f 1
> >>>>>> (XEN) HVM12: f 2
> >>>>>> (XEN) HVM12: f 9
> >>>>>> (XEN) HVM12: f 1
> >>>>>> (XEN) HVM12: f 2
> >>>>>> (XEN) HVM12: 0x0000D4C3: 0xD00:0x04C3 (0) data32data32f 1
> >>>>>> (XEN) HVM12: f 2
> >>>>>> (XEN) HVM12: f 9
> >>>>>> (XEN) HVM12: f 1
> >>>>>> (XEN) HVM12: f 2
> >>>>>> (XEN) HVM12: 0x0000D4C3: 0xD00:0x04C3 (0) opc 0x83opc 0xD7704f 1
> >>>>>> (XEN) HVM12: f 2
> >>>>>> (XEN) HVM12: Unknown opcode at 0D00:04C3=0xD4C3
> >>>>>> (XEN) HVM12: Halt called from %eip 0xD3B4A
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On 8/7/07, Brady Chen <chenchp@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>>>>> Hi, yes, it's crashed in fetch8. it's very slow after I add this print
> >>>>>>> info.
> >>>>>>> the main function of fetch8 seems to be address(). seems crashed in
> >>>>>>> address().
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> (XEN) HVM7: after write16 of movw
> >>>>>>> (XEN) HVM7: top of opcode
> >>>>>>> (XEN) HVM7: Before fetch8
> >>>>>>> (XEN) HVM7: eax        7E80 ecx        2D1B edx           0 ebx
> >>>>>>> 404E
> >>>>>>> (XEN) HVM7: esp       D76F4 ebp        1FF0 esi         7BE edi
> >>>>>>> C37FE
> >>>>>>> (XEN) HVM7: trapno        D errno         0
> >>>>>>> (XEN) HVM7: eip         71F cs          D00 eflags    33206
> >>>>>>> (XEN) HVM7: uesp       CFB4 uss           0
> >>>>>>> (XEN) HVM7: ves         D00 vds         D00 vfs           0 vgs
> >>>>>>> 0
> >>>>>>> (XEN) HVM7: cr0       50032 cr2           0 cr3           0 cr4
> >>>>>>> 651
> >>>>>>> (XEN) HVM7:
> >>>>>>> (XEN) HVM7: Trap (0x6) while in real mode
> >>>>>>> (XEN) HVM7: eax         D00 ecx           0 edx         71F ebx
> >>>>>>> 89
> >>>>>>> (XEN) HVM7: esp       D75E4 ebp       D7630 esi       D7620 edi
> >>>>>>> D00
> >>>>>>> (XEN) HVM7: trapno        6 errno         0
> >>>>>>> (XEN) HVM7: eip       D0800 cs           10 eflags    13046
> >>>>>>> (XEN) HVM7: uesp        71F uss       D76D4
> >>>>>>> (XEN) HVM7: ves       D7610 vds       D3AB9 vfs       D762C vgs
> >>>>>>> D7644
> >>>>>>> (XEN) HVM7: cr0       50032 cr2           0 cr3           0 cr4
> >>>>>>> 651
> >>>>>>> (XEN) HVM7:
> >>>>>>> (XEN) HVM7: 0xd0800 is 0xFFFF
> >>>>>>> (XEN) HVM7: 0xd0804 is 0x7D8B
> >>>>>>> (XEN) HVM7: Halt called from %eip 0xD037C
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On 8/7/07, Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> How about trying:
> >>>>>>>>  printf("Before fetch8\n");
> >>>>>>>>  dump_regs(regs);
> >>>>>>>>  opc = fetch8(regs);
> >>>>>>>>  printf("After fetch8\n");
> >>>>>>>>  switch (opc) { ...
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> This will let you see what eip is being fetched from, and also 
> >>>>>>>> confirm
> >>>>>>>> that
> >>>>>>>> the crash happens within fetch8().
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> You could also try adding more printf()s inside fetch8() and 
> >>>>>>>> address()
> >>>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>> find out which specific bit of fetch8() is crashing (if that indeed 
> >>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>> function that is crashing).
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>  -- Keir
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 7/8/07 11:30, "Brady Chen" <chenchp@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Hi, Keir,
> >>>>>>>>> I made the change as you said:
> >>>>>>>>> change diff is:
> >>>>>>>>> [root@localhost firmware]# hg diff vmxassist/vm86.c
> >>>>>>>>> diff -r 6f18f5bdeea3 tools/firmware/vmxassist/vm86.c
> >>>>>>>>> --- a/tools/firmware/vmxassist/vm86.c   Mon Aug 06 15:33:42 2007 
> >>>>>>>>> +0100
> >>>>>>>>> +++ b/tools/firmware/vmxassist/vm86.c   Tue Aug 07 18:26:12 2007 
> >>>>>>>>> +0800
> >>>>>>>>> @@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ static struct regs saved_rm_regs;
> >>>>>>>>>  static struct regs saved_rm_regs;
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>  #ifdef DEBUG
> >>>>>>>>> -int traceset = 0;
> >>>>>>>>> +int traceset = ~0;
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>  char *states[] = {
> >>>>>>>>>         "<VM86_REAL>",
> >>>>>>>>> @@ -620,6 +620,7 @@ movr(struct regs *regs, unsigned prefix,
> >>>>>>>>>                         TRACE((regs, regs->eip - eip,
> >>>>>>>>>                                 "movw %%%s, *0x%x", rnames[r], 
> >>>>>>>>> addr));
> >>>>>>>>>                         write16(addr, MASK16(val));
> >>>>>>>>> +                       printf("after write16 of movw\n");
> >>>>>>>>>                 }
> >>>>>>>>>                 return 1;
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> @@ -1305,6 +1306,7 @@ opcode(struct regs *regs)
> >>>>>>>>>         unsigned eip = regs->eip;
> >>>>>>>>>         unsigned opc, modrm, disp;
> >>>>>>>>>         unsigned prefix = 0;
> >>>>>>>>> +       printf("top of opcode\n");
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>         if (mode == VM86_PROTECTED_TO_REAL &&
> >>>>>>>>>                 oldctx.cs_arbytes.fields.default_ops_size) {
> >>>>>>>>> @@ -1712,6 +1714,8 @@ trap(int trapno, int errno, struct regs
> >>>>>>>>>                 if (trapno == 14)
> >>>>>>>>>                         printf("Page fault address 0x%x\n",
> >>>>>>>>> get_cr2());
> >>>>>>>>>                 dump_regs(regs);
> >>>>>>>>> +               printf("0xd0800 is 0x%0x\n", *((unsigned
> >>>>>>>>> short*)0xd0800));
> >>>>>>>>> +               printf("0xd0804 is 0x%0x\n", *((unsigned
> >>>>>>>>> short*)0xd0804));
> >>>>>>>>>                 halt();
> >>>>>>>>>         }
> >>>>>>>>>  }
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> here is the output:
> >>>>>>>>> (XEN) HVM6: top of opcode
> >>>>>>>>> (XEN) HVM6: 0x0000D71F: 0xD00:0x071F (0) data32
> >>>>>>>>> (XEN) HVM6: 0x0000D71F: 0xD00:0x071F (0) opc 0x83
> >>>>>>>>> (XEN) HVM6: top of opcode
> >>>>>>>>> (XEN) HVM6: 0x0000D71B: 0xD00:0x071B (0) %es:
> >>>>>>>>> (XEN) HVM6: 0x0000D71B: 0xD00:0x071B (0) addr32
> >>>>>>>>> (XEN) HVM6: 0x0000D71D: 0xD00:0x071D (0) movw %ax, *0xD07FE
> >>>>>>>>> (XEN) HVM6: after write16 of movw
> >>>>>>>>> (XEN) HVM6: top of opcode
> >>>>>>>>> (XEN) HVM6: Trap (0x6) while in real mode
> >>>>>>>>> (XEN) HVM6: eax         D00 ecx           0 edx         71F ebx
> >>>>>>>>> 71E
> >>>>>>>>> (XEN) HVM6: esp       D7554 ebp       D75A0 esi       D7590 edi
> >>>>>>>>> D00
> >>>>>>>>> (XEN) HVM6: trapno        6 errno         0
> >>>>>>>>> (XEN) HVM6: eip       D0800 cs           10 eflags    13046
> >>>>>>>>> (XEN) HVM6: uesp      D4C29 uss           2
> >>>>>>>>> (XEN) HVM6: ves       D4C18 vds       D4D9C vfs       D07FE vgs
> >>>>>>>>> D75B4
> >>>>>>>>> (XEN) HVM6: cr0       50032 cr2           0 cr3           0 cr4
> >>>>>>>>> 651
> >>>>>>>>> (XEN) HVM6:
> >>>>>>>>> (XEN) HVM6: 0xd0800 is 0xFFFF
> >>>>>>>>> (XEN) HVM6: 0xd0804 is 0x7D8B
> >>>>>>>>> (XEN) HVM6: Halt called from %eip 0xD037C
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> objdump:
> >>>>>>>>>    d07ef:       e9 2f ff ff ff          jmp    d0723 <address+0x23>
> >>>>>>>>>    d07f4:       8b 55 08                mov    0x8(%ebp),%edx
> >>>>>>>>>    d07f7:       89 f8                   mov    %edi,%eax
> >>>>>>>>>    d07f9:       8b 5d f4                mov    0xfffffff4(%ebp),%ebx
> >>>>>>>>>    d07fc:       8b 75 f8                mov    0xfffffff8(%ebp),%esi
> >>>>>>>>>    d07ff:       25 ff ff 00 00          and    $0xffff,%eax
> >>>>>>>>>    d0804:       8b 7d fc                mov    0xfffffffc(%ebp),%edi
> >>>>>>>>>    d0807:       89 ec                   mov    %ebp,%esp
> >>>>>>>>>    d0809:       c1 e0 04                shl    $0x4,%eax
> >>>>>>>>>    d080c:       01 d0                   add    %edx,%eax
> >>>>>>>>>    d080e:       5d                      pop    %ebp
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> seems the memory is correct, it's crashed in opcode()
> >>>>>>>>> and i think it's fetch8(regs) which crash the system. I tried
> >>>>>>>>> fetch8(regs) in trap(), but it cause more traps, and let the hvm 
> >>>>>>>>> guest
> >>>>>>>>> be reset.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On 8/7/07, Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> On 7/8/07 10:29, "Keir Fraser" <keir@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> What would be useful is to try to add tracing to see how far
> >>>>>>>>>>> vmxassist
> >>>>>>>>>>> gets
> >>>>>>>>>>> after its last line of tracing before the trap occurs. That last
> >>>>>>>>>>> line
> >>>>>>>>>>> is
> >>>>>>>>>>> currently from vm86.c, line 620. You might try adding extra 
> >>>>>>>>>>> printf()
> >>>>>>>>>>> statements imemdiately after the write16() on line 622, and also 
> >>>>>>>>>>> at
> >>>>>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>> top
> >>>>>>>>>>> of the opcode() function. We need to find out at what point
> >>>>>>>>>>> vmxassist
> >>>>>>>>>>> is
> >>>>>>>>>>> jumping to this bogus address d0800.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Oh, another possibility is that vmxassist has been corrupted in
> >>>>>>>>>> memory.
> >>>>>>>>>> This
> >>>>>>>>>> is particularly likely because, according to the objdump, the
> >>>>>>>>>> 'instruction'
> >>>>>>>>>> that starts at d0800 is actually valid (it'd be an ADD of some 
> >>>>>>>>>> sort).
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> So, within trap() you might want to read say 16 bytes starting at
> >>>>>>>>>> 0xd0800
> >>>>>>>>>> and printf() them. So we can see if they match what objdump says
> >>>>>>>>>> should
> >>>>>>>>>> be
> >>>>>>>>>> there.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>  -- 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


 


Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.