Re: [Xen-devel] debian stretch dom0 + xen 4.9 fails to boot

[Paul Durrant <Paul.Durrant@xxxxxxxxxx>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Xen-devel [mailto:xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> Paul Durrant
> Sent: 07 June 2017 09:10
> To: 'Jan Beulich' <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>; Boris Ostrovsky
> <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: xen-devel (xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) <xen-
> devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] debian stretch dom0 + xen 4.9 fails to boot
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jan Beulich [mailto:JBeulich@xxxxxxxx]
> > Sent: 07 June 2017 09:07
> > To: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Paul Durrant <Paul.Durrant@xxxxxxxxxx>; xen-devel (xen-
> > devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] debian stretch dom0 + xen 4.9 fails to boot
> >
> > >>> On 06.06.17 at 19:00, <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > FWIW, one of machines in our test farm choked on this very patch. I
> > > don't remember details now but essentially it turned out that syslinux
> > > (we are pxe-booting) could not handle changes in ELF sections layout
> > > (the way syslinux calculated how to load the binary into memory resulted
> > > in overlap of some sort).
> >
> > There has always been an overlap between the main and the notes
> > segment; there being only two segments I don't see any other
> > potential for an overlap. In fact I can't see anything other than size
> > differences between a 4.8.1 and a 4.9 binary, plus of course the
> > base address change resulting from Daniel's EFI/GrUB2 patches. So
> > I'm rather puzzled as to what effect Jürgen's patch could have had
> > on the behavior of any loader whatsoever.
> >
> > The only possibly misleading section I notice is .reloc, but that's
> > present in xen-syms only, not in xen.gz. And again it's a result of
> > Daniel's series, not Jürgen's patch.
> >
> 
> I guess I could apply the patch in isolation against 4.8 and see if it causes 
> a
> problem. I'll give that a quick try.
> 

Applying the patch to 4.8.1 *does* cause the problem, so it's definitely 
something in the patch rather than an interaction with other patches in 4.9.

  Paul

>   Paul
> 
> > Jan
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel