Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-unstable test] 64494: regressions - FAIL

[Wei Liu <wei.liu2@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 08:14:00AM -0700, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 19.11.15 at 12:47, <JGross@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On 19/11/15 11:30, Ian Campbell wrote:
> >> On Thu, 2015-11-19 at 11:24 +0100, Juergen Gross wrote:
> >>> On 18/11/15 15:49, Wei Liu wrote:
> >>>> Hi Juergen
> >>>>
> >>>> Looks like there is something we missed after all.
> >>>>
> >>>> On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 02:31:57PM +0000, osstest service owner wrote:
> >>>>> flight 64494 xen-unstable real [real]
> >>>>> http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/64494/ 
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Regressions :-(
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Tests which did not succeed and are blocking,
> >>>>> including tests which could not be run:
> >>>>
> >>>>>  test-amd64-amd64-i386-pvgrub 10 guest-start               fail REGR.
> >>>>> vs. 64035
> >>>>
> >>>> Nov 18 05:11:19.753014 (d2) Bootstrapping...
> >>>> Nov 18 05:11:19.769108 (d2) Xen Minimal OS!
> >>>> Nov 18 05:11:19.769134 (d2)   start_info: 0xa13000(VA)
> >>>> Nov 18 05:11:19.769158 (d2)     nr_pages: 0x20000
> >>>> Nov 18 05:11:19.777046 (d2)   shared_inf: 0xca1fc000(MA)
> >>>> Nov 18 05:11:19.777072 (d2)      pt_base: 0xa16000(VA)
> >>>> Nov 18 05:11:19.785042 (d2) nr_pt_frames: 0xb
> >>>> Nov 18 05:11:19.785077 (d2)     mfn_list: 0x993000(VA)
> >>>> Nov 18 05:11:19.785108 (d2)    mod_start: 0x0(VA)
> >>>> Nov 18 05:11:19.785135 (d2)      mod_len: 0
> >>>> Nov 18 05:11:19.793047 (d2)        flags: 0x0
> >>>> Nov 18 05:11:19.793077 (d2)     cmd_line: (hd0,0)/boot/grub/menu.lst
> >>>> Nov 18 05:11:19.793108 (d2)        stack: 0x972580-0x992580
> >>>> Nov 18 05:11:19.801150 (d2) MM: Init
> >>>> Nov 18 05:11:19.801181 (d2)       _text: 0x0(VA)
> >>>> Nov 18 05:11:19.801197 (d2)      _etext: 0x7b22d(VA)
> >>>> Nov 18 05:11:19.809104 (d2)    _erodata: 0xa4000(VA)
> >>>> Nov 18 05:11:19.809123 (d2)      _edata: 0xa81a8(VA)
> >>>> Nov 18 05:11:19.809138 (d2) stack start: 0x972580(VA)
> >>>> Nov 18 05:11:19.817062 (d2)        _end: 0x992b30(VA)
> >>>> Nov 18 05:11:19.817099 (d2)   start_pfn: a24
> >>>> Nov 18 05:11:19.817125 (d2)     max_pfn: 20000
> >>>> Nov 18 05:11:19.825037 (d2) Mapping memory range 0x1000000 - 0x20000000
> >>>> Nov 18 05:11:19.825071 (d2) setting 0x0-0xa4000 readonly
> >>>> Nov 18 05:11:19.825100 (d2) skipped 1000
> >>>> Nov 18 05:11:19.833049 (d2) MM: Initialise page allocator for
> >>>> b1c000(b1c000)-20000000(20000000)
> >>>> Nov 18 05:11:19.833089 (d2) Page fault at linear address c00008, eip
> >>>> 5fc70, regs 0x98ff28, sp b1c000, our_sp 0x98fefc, code 2
> >>>> Nov 18 05:11:19.849044 (d2) Page fault in pagetable walk (access to
> >>>> invalid memory?).
> >>>>
> >>>> The pvgrub in used is 32 bit. 64 bit (which I myself tested) seemed to
> >>>> be working fine.
> >>>
> >>> Okay, I'm hitting this issue, too. I'll investigate further.
> >> 
> >> Do we want to revert $something in the meantime? If so, what...
> >> 
> > 
> > The problem is really located in pvgrub:
> 
> One question I have here: Even if this gets fixed in pvgrub (or
> mini-os, as it now seems), can we tolerate all existing mini-os
> clones now being broken on -unstable (and hence then also
> eventually on 4.7)?
> 

I think all mini-os clones should pick up the change Juergen posted.
It's mini-os having wrong assumption in the first place.

Wei.

> Jan
> 

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