Re: [Xen-users] Advice on compiling Xen 4.1.2 on Debian 6.0.4 Kernel 3.1.12

[Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>]

(please don't drop people from the CC line) 

On Thu, 2012-04-12 at 13:46 +0100, cyberhawk001@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >> 8.) Rebooted into kernel 3.3.1 with Xen 4.1 AND recorded the trace
> >> log, which ended with a KERNEL PANIC
> > A bug was introduce into 3.1.12. A fix is in the pipeline for the next
> > update but in the meantime you can try reverting:
> >
> > commit 73d63d038ee9f769f5e5b46792d227fe20e442c5
> > Author: Suresh Siddha<suresh.b.siddha@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Date:   Mon Mar 12 11:36:33 2012 -0700
> >
> >      x86/ioapic: Add register level checks to detect bogus io-apic entries
> >
> > (I don't seem to see anything newer than 3.1.10 in the git tree, how
> > odd)
> >
> > Ian.
> 
> 
> AHH ok i see, so this bug goes back that far in the Kernel revisions. 

Actually, I think I misspoke in a confusing way.

A patch was recently added upstream which broke Xen support in the Linux
kernel. It was unfortunately then backported to various stable (3.x.y)
trees. If you go back one version from the latest on any of those then
you should be ok.

v3.4-rc1 was buggy but AFAIK v3.4-rc2 is OK.

It seems that v3.3.1 and v3.2.14 both got the bad backport. However
3.3.0 and 3.2.13 should both be OK as far as I know. I expect that 3.3.2
and 3.2.15 will get the fix too.

> So, the kernel that comes compiled with Debian Wheezy is Kernel 3.2.0.2, 

> is that bug in that version as well or it has been patched / fixed. I 
> have tried before to use Wheezy with the kernel they have for it, 
> 3.2.0.2 and install Xen 4.1 from Synaptic and all that, still didn't 
> boot. BUT, that was before when i didn't have the Serial Console Setup 
> yet, so don't know what the error messages where.

The last ".2" should be "-2" and is the Debian revision. The underlying
kernel would be 3.2.0. I don't think 3.2.0 has the bug mentioned above,
but it may well have had some other.

Wheezy right now has 3.2.12-2 which I think should be OK.

> IF Kernel 3.1.10 does not have those kind of bugs,

v3.1.10 doesn't look to have the error in question. But actually I'm not
sure where 3.1.10 comes from, the only mention of 3.1.y is 3.1.12 in
your subject line (which is what confused me when I could only find
3.1.10, since 3.1.10 is actually the latest) but your text only refers
to 3.3.1 anyway so the mention of 3.1.12 seem to be entirely spurious.
As noted above 3.3.1 has the bug, while 3.3.0 does not.

Ian.


_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-users