[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] Xen dom0 crash: "d0:v0: unhandled page fault (ec=0000)"
On Mon, 2010-11-01 at 18:16 +0000, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > On 11/01/2010 01:46 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 01, 2010 at 01:39:40PM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > >>>>> http://pastebin.com/3m0DpDdW - 2.6.32.24-gd0054d6-dirty - broken > >> .. snip.. > >>> The way is this is supposed to work is: > >>> > >>> 1. Xen gives the domain N pages > >>> 2. There's an E820 which describes M pages (M > N) > >>> 3. The kernel traverses the existing E820 and finds holes and adds > >>> the memory to a new E820_RAM region beyond M > >>> 4. Set up P2M for pages up to N > >>> 5. When the kernel maps all "RAM", the region from N-M is not > >>> present, and has no valid P2M mapping; in that case, xen_make_pte > >>> will return a non-present pte. > >> Right, and somehow his machine/kernel is not doing this. His 'N' ends up > >> being 'M' so > >> the region N-M is added to the "RAM", and xen_make_pte I _think_ returns a > >> non-present pte > >> (or maybe it does present a present pte?) In the previous kernel > >> (2.6.32.18), it > >> does exactly what you described. > > Not that I am actually sure what is causing this. The interesting part is > > that > > he sees this twice: > > > > [ 0.000000] last_pfn = 0x2d0699 max_arch_pfn = 0x400000000 > > [ 0.000000] last_pfn = 0x2f000 max_arch_pfn = 0x400000000 > > > > And he mentioned on IRC to me that this was not due to any debugging > > patches. > > That's just printed by e820_end_pfn(), which is called a few times. > Does it happen native? It's just called twice once for max mem and once for max_low_mem which are different for me (ie. correspond to N and M respectively). Not sure if it happens on bare metal Gianni _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |