[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [PATCH] Fix libxc and pm_timer (Was: [Xen-ia64-devel] Maybedoman_destroy() was not called?)


  • To: "Masaki Kanno" <kanno.masaki@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • From: "Zhang, Xing Z" <xing.z.zhang@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 09:47:43 +0800
  • Delivery-date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 18:48:02 -0700
  • List-id: Discussion of the ia64 port of Xen <xen-ia64-devel.lists.xensource.com>
  • Thread-index: AcfloWNhCbOJWz4rRQioJo8oCfuu2QATpJaA
  • Thread-topic: [PATCH] Fix libxc and pm_timer (Was: [Xen-ia64-devel] Maybedoman_destroy() was not called?)

 

>-----Original Message-----
>From: xen-ia64-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
>[mailto:xen-ia64-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf 
>Of Masaki Kanno
>Sent: 2007年8月24日 0:19
>To: xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: [PATCH] Fix libxc and pm_timer (Was: [Xen-ia64-devel] 
>Maybedoman_destroy() was not called?)
>
>Tue, 21 Aug 2007 09:27:45 +0900, Masaki Kanno wrote:
>
>>Hi all,
>>
>>I tested xm create command with latest xen-ia64-unstable and the 
>>attached patch.  The attached patch intentionally causes contiguous 
>>memory shortage in VHPT allocation for HVM domain.  On the test, 
>>I wanted to confirm that the release proceeding of domain resources 
>>is working correctly when HVM domain creation failed.  But I could 
>>not confirm that it is working correctly.  It seemed to be not 
>>calling domain_destroy(). 
>>The following messages are the result of the test.  Different RID 
>>was allocated whenever I created a HVM domain. 
>>Do you think where a bug hides? 
>>
>> (XEN) domain.c:546: arch_domain_create:546 domain 1 pervcpu_vhpt 1
>> (XEN) tlb_track.c:69: allocated 256 num_entries 256 num_free 256
>> (XEN) tlb_track.c:115: hash 0xf0000002fd350000 hash_size 512
>> (XEN) regionreg.c:193: ### domain f0000000040fc080: 
>rid=80000-c0000 mp_rid
>>=2000
>> (XEN) domain.c:583: arch_domain_create: domain=f0000000040fc080
>> (XEN) vpd base: 0xf000000007be0000, vpd size:65536
>> (XEN) No enough contiguous memory(16384KB) for init_domain_vhpt
>> (XEN) domain.c:546: arch_domain_create:546 domain 2 pervcpu_vhpt 1
>> (XEN) tlb_track.c:69: allocated 256 num_entries 256 num_free 256
>> (XEN) tlb_track.c:115: hash 0xf0000002f6f8c000 hash_size 512
>> (XEN) regionreg.c:193: ### domain f000000004109380: rid=c0000-100000 
>>mp_rid=3000
>> (XEN) domain.c:583: arch_domain_create: domain=f000000004109380
>> (XEN) vpd base: 0xf000000007b90000, vpd size:65536
>> (XEN) No enough contiguous memory(16384KB) for init_domain_vhpt
>> (XEN) domain.c:546: arch_domain_create:546 domain 3 pervcpu_vhpt 1
>> (XEN) tlb_track.c:69: allocated 256 num_entries 256 num_free 256
>> (XEN) tlb_track.c:115: hash 0xf0000002f676c000 hash_size 512
>> (XEN) regionreg.c:193: ### domain f000000007bf1380: 
>rid=100000-140000 
>>mp_rid=4000
>> (XEN) domain.c:583: arch_domain_create: domain=f000000007bf1380
>> (XEN) vpd base: 0xf000000007b50000, vpd size:65536
>> (XEN) No enough contiguous memory(16384KB) for init_domain_vhpt
>>
>
>Hi,
>
>I found two bugs in this problem. 
>
>Bug.1:
> copy_from_GFW_to_nvram() in libxc forgot munmap() if NVRAM data 
> invalid.  Also it forgot free() and close() too. 
> The Bug.1 is solved by munmap_nvram_page.patch. 
>
>I tried the test again after Bug.1 was solved.  But hypervisor did 
>a panic on the test.  The following messages are the result of the 
>test. 
>
Thanks for correct me. This case tells me again how important take care error 
handle is.
I will keep high vigilance in future coding. Thanks again.

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


 


Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.