RE: [Xen-ia64-devel] [PATCH] This is the first patch to merge vcpu.c

["Xu, Anthony" <anthony.xu@xxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks!
BTW, which platform are you using now?

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins) [mailto:dan.magenheimer@xxxxxx]
>Sent: 2005年9月15日 11:53
>To: Xu, Anthony
>Cc: xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: RE: [Xen-ia64-devel] [PATCH] This is the first patch to merge vcpu.c
>
>Script attached.  It's not pretty and will need
>to be adapted for a different environment, but
>I've used the same script for a long time so
>that I can compare results.
>
>The privcnt lines can be removed... I can't find
>the source for privcnt, but it is probably the
>same as what I posted here:
>
>http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-devel/2005-03/msg00216.html
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Xu, Anthony [mailto:anthony.xu@xxxxxxxxx]
>> Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 8:38 PM
>> To: Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins)
>> Cc: xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: RE: [Xen-ia64-devel] [PATCH] This is the first patch
>> to merge vcpu.c
>>
>> Thanks for your suggestion,
>> Please send me your buildlinux script, see whether I can reproduce it.
>> And I can do this stress_test before I send patch..
>>
>> Thanks
>> Anthony
>>
>>
>>
>> >-----Original Message-----
>> >From: Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins)
>> [mailto:dan.magenheimer@xxxxxx]
>> >Sent: 2005年9月15日 10:18
>> >To: Xu, Anthony
>> >Cc: xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >Subject: RE: [Xen-ia64-devel] [PATCH] This is the first
>> patch to merge vcpu.c
>> >
>> >I forgot to add: This kind of bug is VERY difficult to
>> >find and fix because there is no obvious trigger to
>> >start debugging.  With the segmentation fault, the
>> >delivery of a fault is rare enough that one can
>> >add code to the hypervisor to printf info when it
>> >happens, but if a user app (especially something
>> >as large and complex as a compiler) just goes into
>> >an infinite loop, there's nothing as a trigger.
>> >
>> >If you can reproduce this, I'd suggest breaking
>> >down the patch into smaller patches to see what
>> >specific change causes the problem.  If I just
>> >accept the patch, it will be much harder to track
>> >the problem down later.
>> >
>> >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> From: xen-ia64-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >> [mailto:xen-ia64-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
>> >> Of Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins)
>> >> Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 8:09 PM
>> >> To: Xu, Anthony
>> >> Cc: xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >> Subject: RE: [Xen-ia64-devel] [PATCH] This is the first patch
>> >> to merge vcpu.c
>> >>
>> >> Yes, definitely, I run my stress test before checking
>> >> in any change.  I do periodically see a segmentation
>> >> fault (ever since about mid-July when the first round
>> >> of merge changes went in) that I haven't been able
>> >> to isolate yet, but have never seen this "freeze"
>> >> behavior before.
>> >>
>> >> > -----Original Message-----
>> >> > From: Xu, Anthony [mailto:anthony.xu@xxxxxxxxx]
>> >> > Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 7:03 PM
>> >> > To: Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins)
>> >> > Cc: xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >> > Subject: RE: [Xen-ia64-devel] [PATCH] This is the first patch
>> >> > to merge vcpu.c
>> >> >
>> >> > Hi Dan,
>> >> >
>> >> > I haven't stress-tested my patch, my patch almost doesn't
>> >> > touch xeno code,
>> >> > I am curious have you done the same stress-test on dom0
>> >> > without my patch?
>> >> > I think we'd better setup the infrastructure ( domU and VTdom
>> >> > up) first, then we will come back to make all this stable.
>> >> >
>> >> > Thanks
>> >> > Anthony
>> >> >
>> >> > >-----Original Message-----
>> >> > >From: Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins)
>> >> > [mailto:dan.magenheimer@xxxxxx]
>> >> > >Sent: 2005年9月14日 12:48
>> >> > >To: Xu, Anthony
>> >> > >Cc: xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >> > >Subject: RE: [Xen-ia64-devel] [PATCH] This is the first
>> >> > patch to merge vcpu.c
>> >> > >
>> >> > >Hi Anthony --
>> >> > >
>> >> > >I tried your patch.  It applies cleanly and compiles
>> >> > >cleanly.  However, I am seeing problems when testing it.
>> >> > >I run a script that builds linux ten times as
>> >> > >a stress test.  During this test, twice, gcc has
>> >> > >frozen or gotten into an infinite loop; I'm not
>> >> > >really sure other than it continues to eat up CPU
>> >> > >time and not make forward progress.  Other times
>> >> > >building linux completes OK.
>> >> > >
>> >> > >Have you stress-tested the patch on your system?
>> >> > >I would be curious whether you can reproduce it.
>> >> > >I can send you my buildlinux script if you like.
>> >> > >
>> >> > >Dan
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> > >> From: Xu, Anthony [mailto:anthony.xu@xxxxxxxxx]
>> >> > >> Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 6:28 AM
>> >> > >> To: Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins)
>> >> > >> Cc: xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >> > >> Subject: [Xen-ia64-devel] [PATCH] This is the first patch to
>> >> > >> merge vcpu.c
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> Dan,
>> >> > >> This patch is based on ver 6723. And definitely I can boot
>> >> > >> dom0 with this patch.
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> Following things are done in this patch.
>> >> > >> 1. Merge structure pt_reg.
>> >> > >> 2. Though vcpu_info structure has been merged, non-vt domain
>> >> > >> used pointer vcpu->vcpu_info->arch.privregs, and vt domain
>> >> > >> used pointer vcpu->arch.arch_vmx.vpd, the value of these two
>> >> > >> pointers are different, that means vt and non-vt domain still
>> >> > >> use different privileged registers pages, in this case, we
>> >> > >> can't merge vcpu.c, so I merged these two pointer, and put it
>> >> > >> at vcpu->arch.privregs. vcpu->vcpu_info->arch.privregs and
>> >> > >> vcpu->arch.arch_vmx.vpd  will not exist. Why put it at
>> >> > >> vcpu->arch.privregs?  1. There will be one less pointer
>> >> > >> unreferenced when accessing this privileged registers page.
>> >> > >> 2. vcpu->vcpu_info can be accessed by guest, but guest can't
>> >> > >> access privileged registers page through this address, guest
>> >> > >> can access this privileged page only through another special
>> >> > >> mapping. So there is no need to expose this pointer to guest
>> >> > >> by putting it in vcpu->vcpu_info structure. All accesses to
>> >> > >> this page is through VCPU(vcpu,y) macro,
>> >> > >> 3. Merged following functions.
>> >> > >>      Vcpu_set/get_(interruption control registers from cr16
>> >> > >> to cr25), corresponding functions vmx_vcpu_set/get_***
>> >> > will not exist.
>> >> > >>      Vcpu->arch.arch_vmx.in_service[4] will not exist, we
>> >> > >> will all use vcpu->arch.insvc[4]
>> >> > >> 4. Cleaned up some unused structure members and codes.
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> Signed-off-by Anthony Xu <Anthony.xu@xxxxxxxxx>
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> Thanks,
>> >> > >> Anthony
>> >> > >>
>> >> >
>> >>
>>

_______________________________________________
Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
Xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel