Re: [Xen-devel] Crash in set_cpu_sibling_map() booting Xen 4.6.0 on Fusion

[Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 20/11/15 10:25, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 20.11.15 at 02:22, <eswierk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> (XEN) ----[ Xen-4.6.1-pre  x86_64  debug=n  Not tainted ]----
>> (XEN) CPU:    3
>> (XEN) RIP:    e008:[<ffff82d08018302f>] set_cpu_sibling_map+0x3f/0x330
>> (XEN) RFLAGS: 0000000000010006   CONTEXT: hypervisor
>> (XEN) rax: 0000000000000001   rbx: 0000000000000000   rcx: 000000313d5b4080
>> (XEN) rdx: 0000000000000006   rsi: 0000000000000000   rdi: 0000000000000003
>> (XEN) rbp: 0000000000000300   rsp: ffff8301bd87fe90   r8:  ffff8301bd878000
>> (XEN) r9:  000000313d5b4080   r10: 0000000000000001   r11: 0000000000000001
>> (XEN) r12: ffff82d0802fd500   r13: 0000000000000000   r14: 0000000000000000
>> (XEN) r15: 0000000000000003   cr0: 000000008005003b   cr4: 00000000001526a0
>> (XEN) cr3: 00000000bfc75000   cr2: 0000000000000001
>> (XEN) ds: 0000   es: 0000   fs: 0000   gs: 0000   ss: 0000   cs: e008
>> (XEN) Xen stack trace from rsp=ffff8301bd87fe90:
>> (XEN)    00000003802fd800 0000000000000018 0000000000000000 0000010000000000
>> (XEN)    ffff82d0802fd800 0000000000000000 00000000000000c8 0000000000000003
>> (XEN)    0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 ffff82d0801834dc
>> (XEN)    0000000000000000 0000000000000001 0000000000000000 0000000000000000
>> (XEN)    0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000000
>> (XEN)    0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000000
>> (XEN)    0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000000
>> (XEN)    0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000000
>> (XEN)    0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000000
>> (XEN)    0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000000
>> (XEN)    0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000003 ffff8300bfafc000
>> (XEN)    000000313d5b4080 0000000000000000
>> (XEN) Xen call trace:
>> (XEN)    [<ffff82d08018302f>] set_cpu_sibling_map+0x3f/0x330
>> (XEN)    [<ffff82d0801834dc>] start_secondary+0x1bc/0x250
>> (XEN)
>> (XEN) Pagetable walk from 0000000000000001:
>> (XEN)  L4[0x000] = 00000001bd8f0063 ffffffffffffffff
>> (XEN)  L3[0x000] = 00000001bd8ef063 ffffffffffffffff
>> (XEN)  L2[0x000] = 00000001bd8ee063 ffffffffffffffff
>> (XEN)  L1[0x000] = 0000000000000000 ffffffffffffffff
>> (XEN)
>> (XEN) ****************************************
>> (XEN) Panic on CPU 3:
>> (XEN) FATAL PAGE FAULT
>> (XEN) [error_code=0002]
>> (XEN) Faulting linear address: 0000000000000001
>> (XEN) ****************************************
>> (XEN)
>> (XEN) Reboot in five seconds...
>>
>> set_cpu_sibling_map+0x3f is the second cpumask_set_cpu() call in
>> set_cpu_sibling_map():
>> http://xenbits.xen.org/gitweb/?p=xen.git;a=blob;f=xen/arch/x86/smpboot.c;h=0 
>> 94699286f4f6962942024ec8b2b24c7b7996cc0;hb=78833c04250416f1870c458309d3ac0e5c
>> f915fd#l261
> I suppose cpu_to_socket(cpu) returns a value for which the
> socket_cpumask[] entry didn't get set up yet. But to prove that,
> we'd need to see the disassembly around the code location
> above, to be able to associate register values with variables.
>
> If that's the case, then I'd further guess that the CPUID
> information provided by Fusion isn't exactly as one would expect
> on real hardware. Whether we need to fix something, or can
> work around a quirk of theirs depends on the exact nature of
> the issue. Instrumenting code populating socket_cpumask[]
> would be a good first step.

Might also be interesting to see the logs with "apic_verbosity=debug",
and a debug hypervisor.

~Andrew

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel