[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-4.1.6.1] SIGSEGV libxc/xc_save_domain.c: p2m_size >> configured_ram_size
Hello Georg, first of all thank you for answering. Am 13.06.2016 um 12:15 schrieb George Dunlap: > On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 4:22 PM, Philipp Hahn <hahn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> while trying to live migrate some VMs from an xen-4.1.6.1 host "xc_save" >> crashes with a segmentation fault in tools/libxc/xc_domain_save.c:1141 >>> /* >>> * Quick belt and braces sanity check. >>> */ >>> for ( i = 0; i < dinfo->p2m_size; i++ ) >>> { >>> mfn = pfn_to_mfn(i); >>> if( (mfn != INVALID_P2M_ENTRY) && (mfn_to_pfn(mfn) != i) ) >> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >> due to a de-reference through >>> #define pfn_to_mfn(_pfn) \ >>> ((xen_pfn_t) ((dinfo->guest_width==8) \ >>> ? (((uint64_t *)ctx->live_p2m)[(_pfn)]) \ >>> : ((((uint32_t *)ctx->live_p2m)[(_pfn)]) == 0xffffffffU \ >>> ? (-1UL) : (((uint32_t *)ctx->live_p2m)[(_pfn)])))) ... > Given that 4.1 is long out of support, we won't be making a proper fix > in-tree (since it will never be released). I know that 4.1 is EOL. I'm aware of Ubuntu still having xen-4.1 in one of their LTS versions (Precise) and its also in Debian-oldstable, which a lot people (us included) still use. I would prefer to update, but I can for reasons outside my direct control. I'm already working with Stefan Bader from Canonical to backport most of the XSAs to 4.1, so there already exists a "better" version outside of the official Xen repositories. > So what kind of resolution > would be the most help to you? A patch you can apply locally to allow > the save/restore to work? A patch is okay. I've already fixed a lot other bugs in xen-4.1 by patching the last release, so compiling my own version is no problem for me. Philipp _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |