[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] upgrade to 2.6.18.8 ?
xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote on 10/03/2007 07:41:36 AM: > On 10/3/07, Stefan Berger <stefanb@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > I was wondering whether we could apply the 2.6.18.8 patch to the linux tree? > > Assuming that that patch makes 2.6.18 better... > > > > It should be fairly simple. Only two hunks dont apply (both in > > net/core/skbuff.c) and those changes seem to already have been applied > > anyway. > > I have been running 2.6.18.8 with Xen-3.1.0/Xen-3.1.1-rc1/Xen3.1.1-rc2 > and the patch series I just exclude > net-gso-6-linear-segmentation.patch. The only problem I encountered > is anything larger than 512MB in domainU might have such error: > > Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel: ------------[ cut here ]------------ > Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel: kernel BUG at > /usr/src/xen-3.1.1-rc1-src/linux-2.6.18.8-xen/arch/i386/mm/hypervisor.c:167! > Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel: invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] > Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel: SMP > Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel: Modules linked in: ipv6 xt_state xt_tcpudp > iptable_nat ip_nat iptable_mangle ip_conntrack_ftp ip_conntrack_irc > ip_conntrack nfnetlink ipt_REJECT ipt_LOG iptable_filter ip_tables > x_tables dm_mirror dm_mod > Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel: CPU: 0 > Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel: EIP: 0061:[<c0114f1e>] Not tainted VLI > Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel: EFLAGS: 00010282 (2.6.18.8-xenU #3) > Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel: EIP is at xen_pgd_pin+0x6e/0x80 > Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel: eax: ffffffea ebx: eb243ed8 ecx: > 00000001 edx: 00000000 > Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel: esi: 00007ff0 edi: 00000000 ebp: > ebef3000 esp: eb243ed8 > Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel: ds: 007b es: 007b ss: 0069 > Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel: Process nagios (pid: 22284, ti=eb242000 > task=eaa5f550 task.ti=eb242000) > Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX su(pam_unix)[22112]: session closed for user XXXXX > Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel: Stack: 00000002 00043233 2cdb0000 0059b600 > ec126b80 c010f90f ec126bd0 c010f952 > Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel: ec79e7ac 00000000 c011c15c ecbecd48 > ebf6d800 c029de68 ed6037f4 ec126bb4 > Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel: ebef30c0 ebef34a0 eb243fbc bf92b960 > 00000011 00000000 ebef3000 ec2ddb40 > Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel: Call Trace: > Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel: [<c010f90f>] __pgd_pin+0x2f/0x40 > Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel: [<c010f952>] mm_pin+0x32/0x50 > Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel: [<c011c15c>] copy_process+0x101c/0x11c0 > Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel: [<c029de68>] sock_wfree+0x38/0x40 > Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel: [<c011c5fd>] do_fork+0x7d/0x1f0 > Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel: [<c022aa7e>] evtchn_do_upcall+0xbe/0x100 > Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel: [<c0102f0c>] sys_fork+0x2c/0x30 > Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel: [<c0105127>] syscall_call+0x7/0xb > Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel: Code: d2 be f0 7f 00 00 e8 42 c4 fe ff 85 > c0 78 1c 8b 5c 24 0c 8b 74 24 10 83 c4 14 c3 66 90 39 c2 72 c5 0f 0b > 22 00 d8 fb 31 c0 eb bb <0f> 0b a7 00 44 17 32 c0 eb da 90 8d b4 26 00 > 00 00 00 89 c2 83 > Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel: EIP: [<c0114f1e>] xen_pgd_pin+0x6e/0x80 > SS:ESP 0069:eb243ed8 > > I didn't try on 2.6.18 on domainU more than 512MB though so can't > really comment on whether this is just happening to kernel 2.6.18.8. Do you know how to trigger this error? I tried a rather simple 2.6.18.8 domain(CS 217 + 2.6.18.8 patch with those 2 hunks cut out) with 256 MB and then 728 MB and needless to say it does not appear there. > > Sorry if this is out topic. No, it's not. :-) Stefan > > Thanks. > > Kindest regards, > Giam Teck Choon > > _______________________________________________ > 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
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |