Re: [Xen-ia64-devel] BUG at mm.c:605

[DOI Tsunehisa <Doi.Tsunehisa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Alex,

Alex Williamson wrote:
>>>    Ok, should I simply revert xen-ia64-unstable cset 11636:3470d9cd27e5?
>>   Basically, yes. But we can't avoid hypervisor crash during domain
>> destruction.
>>
>>   I think to modify above patch to remove VT-i domain checker like
>> attaced patch, until we will success to seek for the right fix.
> 
>    This seems worse.  Instead of having an identifiable crash footprint,
> the system just hangs with this patch.  Thanks,

 I see.  In this time, I inserted dump_stack() at the condition.
What do you think about it ?

Thanks
- Tsuneshisa Doi

Preliminary fix to avoid hypervisor crash during domain destruction

Signed-off-by: Tsunehisa Doi <Doi.Tsunehisa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

diff -r ee7799388ab1 xen/arch/ia64/xen/mm.c
--- a/xen/arch/ia64/xen/mm.c    Wed Oct 18 22:07:18 2006 -0600
+++ b/xen/arch/ia64/xen/mm.c    Thu Oct 19 17:01:41 2006 +0900
@@ -399,11 +399,11 @@ gmfn_to_mfn_foreign(struct domain *d, un
        unsigned long pte;
 
        // This function may be called from __gnttab_copy()
-       // during destruction of VT-i domain with PV-on-HVM driver.
+       // during domain destruction with VNIF copy receiver.
        // ** FIXME: This is not SMP-safe yet about p2m table. **
        if (unlikely(d->arch.mm.pgd == NULL)) {
-               if (VMX_DOMAIN(d->vcpu[0]))
-                       return INVALID_MFN;
+               dump_stack();           // collect footprint
+               return INVALID_MFN;
        }
        pte = lookup_domain_mpa(d,gpfn << PAGE_SHIFT, NULL);
        if (!pte) {

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