Re: [Xen-devel] So I tried to use xentrace...

[Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx>]

On 05/07/2010 02:16 PM, George Dunlap wrote:
> Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>>>> (XEN) ----[ Xen-4.1-unstable  x86_64  debug=y  Not tainted ]----
>>>> (XEN) CPU:    1
>>>> (XEN) RIP:    e008:[<ffff82c4801215b3>] check_lock+0x1b/0x45
>>>>           
>>
>> This suggests the problem is with misusing a lock in the wrong interrupt
>> context, rather than anything to do with sizes.
>>   
> Except that, it works for me if I use -S 32, and doesn't if I use -S
> 512 (on my 2-core box, equivalent # of pages to -S 256 on your 4-core
> box). :-)  Try it, I suspect it will work.

Yes, it does.  But I'm seeing some pretty odd things while xentrace is
running: first time all my SATA drives stopped responding, and the
second time my ethernet device started getting tx watchdog timeouts. 
Perhaps the large amount of IO caused by xentrace is causing other bugs
to become apparent, but this has been an otherwise very stable system...

    J

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