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

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 12.06.17 at 12:53, <Paul.Durrant@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>  -----Original Message-----
> [snip]
>> > >
>> > > What do you think it best to do for Xen 4.9? Hardcoding a 4k alignment is
>> > > clearly easy and would work around this BIOS issue but, as you say, it
>> does
>> > > grow the image. Reverting Juergen's patch also works round the issue,
>> but
>> > > that is more by luck. Re-working the code is preferable, but I guess it's
>> too
>> > > late to introduce such code-churn in 4.9.
>> >
>> > Reverting Jürgen's code is out of question with all the information
>> > you've gathered by now. I think re-working the EDD code slightly
>> > is the best option. Would you mind giving the attached patch a
>> > try? This still slightly grows the trampoline due to a few more
>> > instructions being needed, but should still be far better than
>> > embedding a whole 4k buffer (and then later finding a BIOS/disk
>> > combination which wants even more). Note that I've left a tiny
>> > bit of debugging code in there.
>> >
>> 
>> Sure, I'll give that a go now.
>> 
> 
> That worked fine:
> 
> (XEN) MBR[80] @ 85e0 (86000)

But that's contrary to your earlier findings: Didn't you say simply
avoiding a 4k-boundary wasn't enough? And it certainly tells us
that this isn't a 4k drive (or at least the BIOS doesn't surface 4k
sectors) - I was really expecting a larger gap between the two
logged values.

> so you can add my Tested-by to that.

I.e. I'm not sure about this, as I'm still uncertain whether some
corruption didn't again occur. Of course APs coming up properly
would already be a relatively good sign (as now the permanent
part of the trampoline would be the predestined area for
corruption to occur in).

Jan

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