Re: [Xen-devel] Ping: Re: [PATCH] Boot PV guests with more than 128GB (v2) for 3.7

[Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Sep 07, 2012 at 10:01:36AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 06.09.12 at 23:03, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 03, 2012 at 07:33:24AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> >>> On 13.08.12 at 09:54, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> >>>> On 03.08.12 at 16:46, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> >> Didn't get to it yet. Sorry for top posting. If you have a patch ready I
> >> >> can test it on Monday - travelling now.
> >> > 
> >> > So here's what I was thinking of (compile tested only).
> >> 
> >> Obviously, if this works, I'd like to see this included in 4.2 (and
> >> 4.1-testing).
> > 
> > No luck. I still get:
> > 
> > (XEN) Pagetable walk from ffff8800443da070:
> > (XEN)  L4[0x110] = 0000009342f95067 0000000000001a0c
> > (XEN)  L3[0x001] = 0000000000000000 ffffffffffffffff
> 
> And I can't see why. I wasn't able to track down the original
> stack trace you saw on the archives - was that identical to
> this one (i.e. nothing changed at all)? If so (please forgive

It does look identical.

> that I'm asking, I just know that I happen to fall into this trap
> once in a while myself), did you indeed build and install the

I know. I did double check - as I couldn't install wholesale the
new RPM (owner of the box needed the old version of it), instead
I did this bit of hack:

xend stop
cd /konrad
rpmcpio xen-*konrad* | cpio -id
tar -czvf /xen.orig.tgz /usr/lib64/*xen*
rm -Rf /usr/lib64/*xen*
mv /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/xen /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/xen.old
ln -s /konrad/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/xen  
/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/xen 
export PATH=/konrad/usr/bin:/konrad/usr/sbin:$PATH
export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/konrad/usr/lib64

xend start
xm create /konrad/test.xm

Which _should_ have taken care of all in the toolstack.

> patched tools? In that case, adding some logging to the code
> in question is presumably the only alternative, short of
> anyone else seeing anything further wrong with that code.

That was my next thought too.. also that would verify that
my hac^H^H^Hinstallation worked properly.

> 
> Jan

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