Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [xen-unstable test] 6413: regressions - FAIL

[George Dunlap <dunlapg@xxxxxxxxx>]

Has there been a fix for this one?

I just did a pull of 4.1-release, and I'm getting this every couple of boots...
 -George

On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 10:00 AM, Keir Fraser <keir.xen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 15/03/2011 09:56, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>>>>> On 15.03.11 at 10:47, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>> On 14.03.11 at 18:22, Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> Ian Jackson writes ("[xen-unstable test] 6413: regressions - FAIL"):
>>>>> Tests which did not succeed and are blocking:
>>>>>  test-amd64-amd64-xl-win       5 xen-boot               fail REGR. vs. 
>>>>> 6396
>>>>
>>>> Xen boot crash.  Lots of these ...
>>>
>>> Yes, I can see my thinko is c/s 23033:84bacd800bf8  (too bad all
>>> my test systems either have ARAT or no MSI support in their HPETs).
>>> I'm sorry for that and will send a fix soon.
>>>
>>> Jan
>>>
>>>> Mar 13 23:29:31.091587 (XEN) Brought up 8 CPUs
>>>> Mar 13 23:29:31.205401 (XEN) Testing NMI watchdog --- CPU#0 okay. CPU#1
>>>> stuck.
>>>> CPU#2 stuck. CPU#3 stuck. CPU#4 stuck. CPU#5 stuck. CPU#6 s
>>>> tuck. CPU#7 stuck.
>>
>> But I hope these aren't related, as I can't see how any recent
>> change could have broken the watchdog NMI setup logic.
>
> I think our NMI watchdog support is not working properly on all new CPUs,
> and it's been that way for some time.
>
>  -- Keir
>
>> Jan
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>

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