Re: [Xen-devel] backport requests for 4.x-testing

[Teck Choon Giam <giamteckchoon@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 11:56 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
<konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >> > Applied 23225 and 24013. The other, toolstack-related, patches I will 
>> >> > leave
>> >> > for a tools maintainer to ack or apply.
>> >>
>> > Hey Teck,
>> >
>> > Thanks for reporting!
>> >
>> >> With the two backport patches committed in xen-4.1-testing (changeset
>> >> 23271:13741fd6253b), xl list or xl create domU will cause 100% CPU and
>> >
>> > xl list?
>>
>> After a reboot with no domU running, xl list is fine but if I start a
>> hvm domU will be stuck and caused high load then open another ssh
>> terminal to issue xl list will stuck as well.
>
> This fix fixes it for me:
>
> diff -r 13741fd6253b xen/arch/x86/domain.c
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/domain.c     Thu Mar 29 10:20:58 2012 +0100
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/domain.c     Thu Mar 29 11:44:54 2012 -0400
> @@ -558,9 +558,9 @@ int arch_domain_create(struct domain *d,
>         d->arch.is_32bit_pv = d->arch.has_32bit_shinfo =
>             (CONFIG_PAGING_LEVELS != 4);
>
> -        spin_lock_init(&d->arch.e820_lock);
>     }
>
> +    spin_lock_init(&d->arch.e820_lock);
>     memset(d->arch.cpuids, 0, sizeof(d->arch.cpuids));
>     for ( i = 0; i < MAX_CPUID_INPUT; i++ )
>     {
> @@ -605,8 +605,8 @@ void arch_domain_destroy(struct domain *
>
>     if ( is_hvm_domain(d) )
>         hvm_domain_destroy(d);
> -    else
> -        xfree(d->arch.e820);
> +
> +    xfree(d->arch.e820);
>
>     vmce_destroy_msr(d);
>     free_domain_pirqs(d);
>
>
> The issue is that upstream we have two 'domain structs' - one for PV and
> one for HVM. In 4.1 it is just 'arch_domain' and the calls to create
> the guests are going through the same interface (at least using xl, with
> xm they are seperate). And I only initialized the spinlock in the PV case,
> but not in the HVM case. This fix to the backport resolves the problem.

Thanks for your fast and prompt fix ;)

I am compiling with the fix patch you provided on top of
xen-4.1-testing changeset 23271:13741fd6253b.  Will test and report
back if you are interested ;)

Kindest regards,
Giam Teck Choon


>
> Keir, please apply this to my botched back-port of  23225.

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