Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/1] Xen ARINC 653 Scheduler (updated to add support for CPU pools)

[Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 30/06/2010 21:44, "Kathy Hadley" <Kathy.Hadley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Good afternoon,
>   We have determined that changeset 21507 introduced the error that
> prevents unprivileged domains from running on our machine using the
> 32-bit hypervisor.
> 
>   With changeset 21506, we are able to run unprivileged domains using
> the credit scheduler.  We cannot do so with changeset 21507 (or
> subsequent changesets) -- the unprivileged domains appear to be stuck in
> an idle loop (as indicated by the call trace below).
> 
>   I'd appreciate help addressing this issue.

The tools no longer automatically create /dev/xen/evtchn and expect it to
already be created by the distro (e.g., via a udev rule) My guess would be
that you are missing /dev/xen/evtchn. Ccing the patch author.

 -- Keir

>   Thanks,
> Kathy Hadley
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Keir Fraser [mailto:keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2010 6:36 PM
>> To: Kathy Hadley; George Dunlap
>> Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/1] Xen ARINC 653 Scheduler (updated
>> to add support for CPU pools)
>> 
>> I've just built latest xen-unstable.hg and linux-2.6.18-xen.hg and
>> booted a
>> domU just fine. All my builds are 64-bit though whereas yours are 32-
>> bit. I
>> suppose that could cause a difference (in particular, 32-bit
> hypervisor
>> is
>> less tested by people).
>> 
>>  -- Keir
>> 
>> On 23/06/2010 22:16, "Kathy Hadley" <Kathy.Hadley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Keir,
>>>   I see this same behavior when I run the credit scheduler.  It
>> doesn't
>>> look like it's localized to the scheduler I'm working on.  I pulled
>> the
>>> latest code from http://xenbits.xensource.com/linux-2.6.18-xen.hg
> and
>>> rebuilt the kernel earlier today, with no effect.
>>> 
>>>   Note that I can successfully start the domain with Xen-3.4.1 and
>>> Xen-4.0.0, using the same configuration file as I am using with
>>> xen-unstable.
>>> 
>>> Kathy
>>> 
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Keir Fraser [mailto:keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2010 4:23 PM
>>>> To: Kathy Hadley; George Dunlap
>>>> Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/1] Xen ARINC 653 Scheduler
>> (updated
>>>> to add support for CPU pools)
>>>> 
>>>> On 23/06/2010 20:57, "Kathy Hadley" <Kathy.Hadley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Call Trace:
>>>>>   [<c01013a7>] hypercall_page+0x3a7  <--
>>>>>   [<c0109005>] raw_safe_halt+0xa5
>>>>>   [<c0104789>] xen_idle+0x49
>>>>>   [<c010482d>] cpu_idle+0x8d
>>>>>   [<c0404895>] start_kernel+0x3f5
>>>>>   [<c04041d0>] do_early_param+0x80
>>>>> 
>>>>>   Does this shed any light on the situation?
>>>> 
>>>> Looks like you're in the idle loop. So, no, it doesn't really shed
>>> much
>>>> useful light.
>>>> 
>>>>  -- Keir
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 



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