* RE: cannot start more than one domU
@ 2005-11-09 16:48 Ian Pratt
2005-11-09 16:55 ` David F Barrera
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Ian Pratt @ 2005-11-09 16:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Nakajima, Jun, David F Barrera, stoeni; +Cc: xen-devel
> >> attached you find the xm dmesg output of my xen-unstable machine,
> >> first domU starts correct, second/third crashes (see log).
> >>
> >> dom0 and domU were both compiled with smp support (smt
> enabled) on a
> >> dual xeon 2.8.
> >>
> >> did i missed something at kernel configuration?
> >>
> >>
> > No. I reported this problem some time back and am still seeing it
> > daily: http://bugzilla.xensource.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=267
> >
>
> Sounds like a critical bug. Is anybody taking a look at this?
> BTW, is this specific to PAE?
It's on our 'most critical' list, but help is always appreciated. You
need a machine with >= 4GB to repro it. xm-test can throw it up, but
having a simpler repro recipe would be a big help
There's a 'vcpu crashed' x86_64 issue too, though I forget the bug
number.
Ian
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: cannot start more than one domU
2005-11-09 16:48 cannot start more than one domU Ian Pratt
@ 2005-11-09 16:55 ` David F Barrera
0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: David F Barrera @ 2005-11-09 16:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ian Pratt; +Cc: xen-devel, stoeni, Nakajima, Jun
Ian Pratt wrote:
>>>>attached you find the xm dmesg output of my xen-unstable machine,
>>>>first domU starts correct, second/third crashes (see log).
>>>>
>>>>dom0 and domU were both compiled with smp support (smt
>>>>
>>>>
>>enabled) on a
>>
>>
>>>>dual xeon 2.8.
>>>>
>>>>did i missed something at kernel configuration?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>No. I reported this problem some time back and am still seeing it
>>>daily: http://bugzilla.xensource.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=267
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Sounds like a critical bug. Is anybody taking a look at this?
>>BTW, is this specific to PAE?
>>
>>
>
>It's on our 'most critical' list, but help is always appreciated. You
>need a machine with >= 4GB to repro it. xm-test can throw it up, but
>having a simpler repro recipe would be a big help
>
>There's a 'vcpu crashed' x86_64 issue too, though I forget the bug
>number.
>
>
I have not seen it since last Friday. The defects is
http://bugzilla.xensource.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=358
>Ian
>
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* RE: cannot start more than one domU
@ 2005-11-09 16:59 Nakajima, Jun
2005-11-09 17:15 ` David F Barrera
2005-11-09 20:50 ` stoeni
0 siblings, 2 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Nakajima, Jun @ 2005-11-09 16:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ian Pratt, David F Barrera, stoeni; +Cc: xen-devel
Ian Pratt wrote:
>>>> attached you find the xm dmesg output of my xen-unstable machine,
>>>> first domU starts correct, second/third crashes (see log).
>>>>
>>>> dom0 and domU were both compiled with smp support (smt enabled) on
>>>> a dual xeon 2.8.
>>>>
>>>> did i missed something at kernel configuration?
>>>>
>>>>
>>> No. I reported this problem some time back and am still seeing it
>>> daily: http://bugzilla.xensource.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=267
>>>
>>
>> Sounds like a critical bug. Is anybody taking a look at this?
>> BTW, is this specific to PAE?
>
> It's on our 'most critical' list, but help is always appreciated. You
> need a machine with >= 4GB to repro it. xm-test can throw it up, but
> having a simpler repro recipe would be a big help
>
Does this problem happen when creating multiple domUs _simultaneously_
(using xm-test) or happen even when making domUs sequentially (by
hands)?
Jun
---
Intel Open Source Technology Center
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: cannot start more than one domU
2005-11-09 16:59 Nakajima, Jun
@ 2005-11-09 17:15 ` David F Barrera
2005-11-09 20:50 ` stoeni
1 sibling, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: David F Barrera @ 2005-11-09 17:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Nakajima, Jun; +Cc: Ian Pratt, xen-devel, stoeni
Nakajima, Jun wrote:
>Ian Pratt wrote:
>
>
>>>>>attached you find the xm dmesg output of my xen-unstable machine,
>>>>>first domU starts correct, second/third crashes (see log).
>>>>>
>>>>>dom0 and domU were both compiled with smp support (smt enabled) on
>>>>>a dual xeon 2.8.
>>>>>
>>>>>did i missed something at kernel configuration?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>No. I reported this problem some time back and am still seeing it
>>>>daily: http://bugzilla.xensource.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=267
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Sounds like a critical bug. Is anybody taking a look at this?
>>>BTW, is this specific to PAE?
>>>
>>>
>>It's on our 'most critical' list, but help is always appreciated. You
>>need a machine with >= 4GB to repro it. xm-test can throw it up, but
>>having a simpler repro recipe would be a big help
>>
>>
>>
>
>Does this problem happen when creating multiple domUs _simultaneously_
>(using xm-test) or happen even when making domUs sequentially (by
>hands)?
>
>
I see it daily when running xm-test. Yesterday, however, I saw it for
the first time with only one guest domain running. Because there was yet
another problem
(http://bugzilla.xensource.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=390), I could
not tell whether they were related--I now believe they are not. At any
rate, that is probably the only other time I've seen it, and I have not
been able to replicate that situation. Xm-test recreates it
consistently, though.
>Jun
>---
>Intel Open Source Technology Center
>
>_______________________________________________
>Xen-devel mailing list
>Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
>http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
>
>
>
--
Regards,
David F Barrera
Linux Technology Center
Systems and Technology Group, IBM
"The wisest men follow their own direction. "
Euripides
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread* Re: cannot start more than one domU
2005-11-09 16:59 Nakajima, Jun
2005-11-09 17:15 ` David F Barrera
@ 2005-11-09 20:50 ` stoeni
1 sibling, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: stoeni @ 2005-11-09 20:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Nakajima, Jun; +Cc: Ian Pratt, David F Barrera, xen-devel
Nakajima, Jun schrieb:
> Ian Pratt wrote:
>
>>>>>attached you find the xm dmesg output of my xen-unstable machine,
>>>>>first domU starts correct, second/third crashes (see log).
>>>>>
>>>>>dom0 and domU were both compiled with smp support (smt enabled) on
>>>>>a dual xeon 2.8.
>>>>>
>>>>>did i missed something at kernel configuration?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>No. I reported this problem some time back and am still seeing it
>>>>daily: http://bugzilla.xensource.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=267
>>>>
>>>
>>>Sounds like a critical bug. Is anybody taking a look at this?
>>>BTW, is this specific to PAE?
>>
>>It's on our 'most critical' list, but help is always appreciated. You
>>need a machine with >= 4GB to repro it. xm-test can throw it up, but
>>having a simpler repro recipe would be a big help
>>
>
>
> Does this problem happen when creating multiple domUs _simultaneously_
> (using xm-test) or happen even when making domUs sequentially (by
> hands)?
sequentially, started first domU by hand, the next etc. tried a reboot
and same crashes while starting the init scripts. xm-test was not used.
this machine has physically 6gb ram.
how can i help you tracking this down?
--
Tschaw/2,
Stoeni!
++ Please remember: rm -rf means "read mail -really fast" ++
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* RE: cannot start more than one domU
@ 2005-11-09 16:39 Nakajima, Jun
2005-11-09 16:43 ` David F Barrera
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Nakajima, Jun @ 2005-11-09 16:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David F Barrera, stoeni; +Cc: xen-devel
David F Barrera wrote:
> stoeni wrote:
>
>> hi,
>>
>> attached you find the xm dmesg output of my xen-unstable machine,
>> first
>> domU starts correct, second/third crashes (see log).
>>
>> dom0 and domU were both compiled with smp support (smt enabled) on a
>> dual xeon 2.8.
>>
>> did i missed something at kernel configuration?
>>
>>
> No. I reported this problem some time back and am still seeing it
> daily: http://bugzilla.xensource.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=267
>
Sounds like a critical bug. Is anybody taking a look at this? BTW, is
this specific to PAE?
Jun
---
Intel Open Source Technology Center
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: cannot start more than one domU
2005-11-09 16:39 Nakajima, Jun
@ 2005-11-09 16:43 ` David F Barrera
2005-11-09 19:42 ` David F Barrera
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: David F Barrera @ 2005-11-09 16:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Nakajima, Jun; +Cc: xen-devel, stoeni
Nakajima, Jun wrote:
>David F Barrera wrote:
>
>
>>stoeni wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>hi,
>>>
>>>attached you find the xm dmesg output of my xen-unstable machine,
>>>first
>>>domU starts correct, second/third crashes (see log).
>>>
>>>dom0 and domU were both compiled with smp support (smt enabled) on a
>>>dual xeon 2.8.
>>>
>>>did i missed something at kernel configuration?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>No. I reported this problem some time back and am still seeing it
>>daily: http://bugzilla.xensource.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=267
>>
>>
>>
>
>Sounds like a critical bug. Is anybody taking a look at this? BTW, is
>this specific to PAE?
>
>
I've only seen it on a PAE enabled box.
>
>Jun
>---
>Intel Open Source Technology Center
>
>_______________________________________________
>Xen-devel mailing list
>Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
>http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
>
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: cannot start more than one domU
2005-11-09 16:43 ` David F Barrera
@ 2005-11-09 19:42 ` David F Barrera
0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: David F Barrera @ 2005-11-09 19:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: xen-devel; +Cc: stoeni, Nakajima, Jun
David F Barrera wrote:
>
>
> Nakajima, Jun wrote:
>
>> David F Barrera wrote:
>>
>>
>>> stoeni wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> hi,
>>>>
>>>> attached you find the xm dmesg output of my xen-unstable machine,
>>>> first domU starts correct, second/third crashes (see log).
>>>>
>>>> dom0 and domU were both compiled with smp support (smt enabled) on a
>>>> dual xeon 2.8.
>>>>
>>>> did i missed something at kernel configuration?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> No. I reported this problem some time back and am still seeing it
>>> daily: http://bugzilla.xensource.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=267
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> Sounds like a critical bug. Is anybody taking a look at this? BTW, is
>> this specific to PAE?
>>
> I've only seen it on a PAE enabled box.
To clarify a bit more, if I build Xen on the same machine without PAE
enabled, I do not see the problem. Further, the xm-test failures are due
to this problem:
Platform | PASS | FAIL | XPASS | XFAIL |
---------------------+------+------+-------+-------+
x335sles9_pae4gb | 65 | 26 | 0 | 1 |
<==============PAE enabled results
...
x335sles9_pae4gb | 87 | 2 | 1 | 0 | <==========
Same machine, non-PAE.
>
>>
>> Jun
>> ---
>> Intel Open Source Technology Center
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Xen-devel mailing list
>> Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
>> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
>
--
Regards,
David F Barrera
Linux Technology Center
Systems and Technology Group, IBM
"The wisest men follow their own direction. "
Euripides
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* cannot start more than one domU
@ 2005-11-09 15:23 stoeni
2005-11-09 16:04 ` David F Barrera
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: stoeni @ 2005-11-09 15:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: xen-devel
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 349 bytes --]
hi,
attached you find the xm dmesg output of my xen-unstable machine, first
domU starts correct, second/third crashes (see log).
dom0 and domU were both compiled with smp support (smt enabled) on a
dual xeon 2.8.
did i missed something at kernel configuration?
--
Tschaw/2,
Stoeni!
++ Please remember: rm -rf means "read mail -really fast" ++
[-- Attachment #2: xen-crash.txt --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 7265 bytes --]
Xen version 3.0-devel (root@localhost) (gcc version 3.3.5 (Debian 1:3.3.5-13)) Wed Nov 9 14:56:57 CET 2005
Latest ChangeSet: Tue Nov 8 17:42:07 2005 +0100 7702:b3c2bc39d815
(XEN) Physical RAM map:
(XEN) 0000000000000000 - 000000000009f000 (usable)
(XEN) 000000000009f000 - 00000000000a0000 (reserved)
(XEN) 00000000000e0000 - 0000000000100000 (reserved)
(XEN) 0000000000100000 - 00000000bffcdfb9 (usable)
(XEN) 00000000bffcdfb9 - 00000000bfff0000 (reserved)
(XEN) 00000000bfff0000 - 00000000bffff000 (ACPI data)
(XEN) 00000000bffff000 - 00000000c0000000 (ACPI NVS)
(XEN) 00000000fec00000 - 00000000fec86000 (reserved)
(XEN) 00000000fee00000 - 00000000fee01000 (reserved)
(XEN) 00000000ffc00000 - 0000000100000000 (reserved)
(XEN) 0000000100000000 - 00000001c0000000 (usable)
(XEN) System RAM: 6143MB (6290864kB)
(XEN) Xen heap: 10MB (10420kB)
(XEN) PAE enabled, limit: 16 GB
(XEN) found SMP MP-table at 000ff780
(XEN) DMI 2.3 present.
(XEN) Using APIC driver default
(XEN) ACPI: RSDP (v000 ACPIAM ) @ 0x000f7de0
(XEN) ACPI: RSDT (v001 A M I OEMRSDT 0x05000503 MSFT 0x00000097) @ 0xbfff0000
(XEN) ACPI: FADT (v001 A M I OEMFACP 0x05000503 MSFT 0x00000097) @ 0xbfff0200
(XEN) ACPI: MADT (v001 A M I OEMAPIC 0x05000503 MSFT 0x00000097) @ 0xbfff0300
(XEN) ACPI: MCFG (v001 A M I OEMMCFG 0x05000503 MSFT 0x00000097) @ 0xbfff03e0
(XEN) ACPI: OEMB (v001 A M I OEMBIOS 0x05000503 MSFT 0x00000097) @ 0xbffff040
(XEN) ACPI: DSDT (v001 LHREF LHREF001 0x00000001 INTL 0x02002026) @ 0x00000000
(XEN) ACPI: Local APIC address 0xfee00000
(XEN) ACPI: LAPIC (acpi_id[0x01] lapic_id[0x00] enabled)
(XEN) Processor #0 15:4 APIC version 20
(XEN) ACPI: LAPIC (acpi_id[0x02] lapic_id[0x06] enabled)
(XEN) Processor #6 15:4 APIC version 20
(XEN) ACPI: LAPIC (acpi_id[0x03] lapic_id[0x01] enabled)
(XEN) Processor #1 15:4 APIC version 20
(XEN) ACPI: LAPIC (acpi_id[0x04] lapic_id[0x07] enabled)
(XEN) Processor #7 15:4 APIC version 20
(XEN) ACPI: LAPIC_NMI (acpi_id[0x01] high edge lint[0x1])
(XEN) ACPI: LAPIC_NMI (acpi_id[0x02] high edge lint[0x1])
(XEN) ACPI: LAPIC_NMI (acpi_id[0x03] high edge lint[0x1])
(XEN) ACPI: LAPIC_NMI (acpi_id[0x04] high edge lint[0x1])
(XEN) ACPI: IOAPIC (id[0x08] address[0xfec00000] gsi_base[0])
(XEN) IOAPIC[0]: apic_id 8, version 32, address 0xfec00000, GSI 0-23
(XEN) ACPI: IOAPIC (id[0x09] address[0xfec10000] gsi_base[24])
(XEN) IOAPIC[1]: apic_id 9, version 32, address 0xfec10000, GSI 24-47
(XEN) ACPI: INT_SRC_OVR (bus 0 bus_irq 0 global_irq 2 dfl dfl)
(XEN) ACPI: INT_SRC_OVR (bus 0 bus_irq 9 global_irq 9 high level)
(XEN) ACPI: IRQ0 used by override.
(XEN) ACPI: IRQ2 used by override.
(XEN) ACPI: IRQ9 used by override.
(XEN) Enabling APIC mode: Flat. Using 2 I/O APICs
(XEN) Using ACPI (MADT) for SMP configuration information
(XEN) Initializing CPU#0
(XEN) Detected 2793.158 MHz processor.
(XEN) Using scheduler: Simple EDF Scheduler (sedf)
(XEN) CPU: Trace cache: 12K uops, L1 D cache: 16K
(XEN) CPU: L2 cache: 1024K
(XEN) CPU: Physical Processor ID: 0
(XEN) CPU0: Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 2.80GHz stepping 01
(XEN) Booting processor 1/1 eip 90000
(XEN) Initializing CPU#1
(XEN) CPU: Trace cache: 12K uops, L1 D cache: 16K
(XEN) CPU: L2 cache: 1024K
(XEN) CPU: Physical Processor ID: 0
(XEN) CPU1: Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 2.80GHz stepping 01
(XEN) Booting processor 2/6 eip 90000
(XEN) Initializing CPU#2
(XEN) CPU: Trace cache: 12K uops, L1 D cache: 16K
(XEN) CPU: L2 cache: 1024K
(XEN) CPU: Physical Processor ID: 3
(XEN) CPU2: Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 2.80GHz stepping 01
(XEN) Booting processor 3/7 eip 90000
(XEN) Initializing CPU#3
(XEN) CPU: Trace cache: 12K uops, L1 D cache: 16K
(XEN) CPU: L2 cache: 1024K
(XEN) CPU: Physical Processor ID: 3
(XEN) CPU3: Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 2.80GHz stepping 01
(XEN) Total of 4 processors activated.
(XEN) ENABLING IO-APIC IRQs
(XEN) ..TIMER: vector=0x31 pin1=2 pin2=-1
(XEN) checking TSC synchronization across 4 CPUs: passed.
(XEN) Platform timer is 1.193MHz PIT
(XEN) Brought up 4 CPUs
(XEN) mtrr: v2.0 (20020519)
(XEN) *** LOADING DOMAIN 0 ***
(XEN) Xen-ELF header found: 'GUEST_OS=linux,GUEST_VER=2.6,XEN_VER=3.0,VIRT_BASE=0xC0000000,PAE=yes,LOADER=generic'
(XEN) PHYSICAL MEMORY ARRANGEMENT:
(XEN) Dom0 alloc.: 0000000007800000->0000000008000000 (30720 pages to be allocated)
(XEN) VIRTUAL MEMORY ARRANGEMENT:
(XEN) Loaded kernel: c0100000->c0489de8
(XEN) Init. ramdisk: c048a000->c048a000
(XEN) Phys-Mach map: c048a000->c04aa000
(XEN) Start info: c04aa000->c04ab000
(XEN) Page tables: c04ab000->c04b4000
(XEN) Boot stack: c04b4000->c04b5000
(XEN) TOTAL: c0000000->c0800000
(XEN) ENTRY ADDRESS: c0100000
(XEN) Scrubbing Free RAM: ........................................................................done.
(XEN) Xen trace buffers: disabled
(XEN) *** Serial input -> DOM0 (type 'CTRL-a' three times to switch input to Xen).
(XEN) Domain 2 (vcpu#0) crashed on cpu#1:
(XEN) CPU: 1
(XEN) EIP: e019:[<c0115198>]
(XEN) EFLAGS: 00000246 CONTEXT: guest
(XEN) eax: 00000000 ebx: 00000000 ecx: 00000000 edx: 00000000
(XEN) esi: 00000000 edi: 00000000 ebp: 00000000 esp: c0321ed0
(XEN) cr0: 8005003b cr3: 03b9c000
(XEN) ds: e021 es: e021 fs: 0000 gs: e021 ss: e021 cs: e019
(XEN) Guest stack trace from esp=c0321ed0:
(XEN) c0000004 00000003 c0115198 0001e019 00010246 00000000 00000000 00000000
(XEN) c0000000 c0329aba c4000000 00001000 00000000 c02c0f68 c0321f94 00000000
(XEN) 00000000 c0800000 c0496020 0002d800 c0329e15 c0496020 0000002b 00000000
(XEN) c0321fa4 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 0002d800 00000000 00000004
(XEN) 00000003 c0495018 00000800 00000000 c0495000 00000000 00001000 c032a214
(XEN) c0495000 c0294a8d 00000001 00001000 c031f880 c0294a8d 00000001 c032a51b
(XEN) c02c0f40 003a1aff c031f880 c0326605 c02bf0ba c0100000 c0326bd8 c0321ff4
(XEN) c0335f60 00000080 00000000 00000000 ffffe000 c0492000 00000000 ffffe000
(XEN) c0492000 00000000 00000000 c0322827 c0321ff4 00000000 00000000 00000000
(XEN) 00000000 c0347ec0 01020800 c0100066
(XEN) Domain 3 (vcpu#0) crashed on cpu#1:
(XEN) CPU: 1
(XEN) EIP: e019:[<c032c627>]
(XEN) EFLAGS: 00000202 CONTEXT: guest
(XEN) eax: 00000000 ebx: c1000000 ecx: 001f8008 edx: 00810020
(XEN) esi: c049b000 edi: c1030000 ebp: 00001000 esp: c0321ed4
(XEN) cr0: 8005003b cr3: 03b95000
(XEN) ds: e021 es: e021 fs: 0000 gs: e021 ss: e021 cs: e019
(XEN) Guest stack trace from esp=c0321ed4:
(XEN) c1030000 00000003 c032c627 0001e019 00010202 c049b000 0002d800 00001000
(XEN) 00000023 ffffffff 0000007f 0002d800 00000001 00000811 00000000 01000000
(XEN) 00000080 00810020 00001000 c032cbf9 c0355e30 00810020 00000080 01000000
(XEN) c02de780 00000000 c0321f94 c032d374 c02de780 00810020 00000080 01000000
(XEN) c02de780 c032d3c7 c02de780 00000000 00040800 c031f880 c0294a8d 00000000
(XEN) c032d41c 00000000 c02de780 c0321f94 00000000 00000000 c032664c c0321f94
(XEN) 0002d800 00000000 00013000 80000000 c0100000 c0326be2 c0321ff4 c0335f60
(XEN) 00000080 00000000 00000000 ffffe000 c0492000 00000000 ffffe000 c0492000
(XEN) 00000000 00000000 c0322827 c0321ff4 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000
(XEN) c0347ec0 01020800 c0100066
[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 138 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread* Re: cannot start more than one domU
2005-11-09 15:23 stoeni
@ 2005-11-09 16:04 ` David F Barrera
2005-11-10 20:11 ` stoeni
2005-11-15 23:13 ` stoeni
2 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: David F Barrera @ 2005-11-09 16:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: stoeni; +Cc: xen-devel
stoeni wrote:
>hi,
>
>attached you find the xm dmesg output of my xen-unstable machine, first
>domU starts correct, second/third crashes (see log).
>
>dom0 and domU were both compiled with smp support (smt enabled) on a
>dual xeon 2.8.
>
>did i missed something at kernel configuration?
>
>
No. I reported this problem some time back and am still seeing it daily:
http://bugzilla.xensource.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=267
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Xen version 3.0-devel (root@localhost) (gcc version 3.3.5 (Debian 1:3.3.5-13)) Wed Nov 9 14:56:57 CET 2005
>Latest ChangeSet: Tue Nov 8 17:42:07 2005 +0100 7702:b3c2bc39d815
>
>(XEN) Physical RAM map:
>(XEN) 0000000000000000 - 000000000009f000 (usable)
>(XEN) 000000000009f000 - 00000000000a0000 (reserved)
>(XEN) 00000000000e0000 - 0000000000100000 (reserved)
>(XEN) 0000000000100000 - 00000000bffcdfb9 (usable)
>(XEN) 00000000bffcdfb9 - 00000000bfff0000 (reserved)
>(XEN) 00000000bfff0000 - 00000000bffff000 (ACPI data)
>(XEN) 00000000bffff000 - 00000000c0000000 (ACPI NVS)
>(XEN) 00000000fec00000 - 00000000fec86000 (reserved)
>(XEN) 00000000fee00000 - 00000000fee01000 (reserved)
>(XEN) 00000000ffc00000 - 0000000100000000 (reserved)
>(XEN) 0000000100000000 - 00000001c0000000 (usable)
>(XEN) System RAM: 6143MB (6290864kB)
>(XEN) Xen heap: 10MB (10420kB)
>(XEN) PAE enabled, limit: 16 GB
>(XEN) found SMP MP-table at 000ff780
>(XEN) DMI 2.3 present.
>(XEN) Using APIC driver default
>(XEN) ACPI: RSDP (v000 ACPIAM ) @ 0x000f7de0
>(XEN) ACPI: RSDT (v001 A M I OEMRSDT 0x05000503 MSFT 0x00000097) @ 0xbfff0000
>(XEN) ACPI: FADT (v001 A M I OEMFACP 0x05000503 MSFT 0x00000097) @ 0xbfff0200
>(XEN) ACPI: MADT (v001 A M I OEMAPIC 0x05000503 MSFT 0x00000097) @ 0xbfff0300
>(XEN) ACPI: MCFG (v001 A M I OEMMCFG 0x05000503 MSFT 0x00000097) @ 0xbfff03e0
>(XEN) ACPI: OEMB (v001 A M I OEMBIOS 0x05000503 MSFT 0x00000097) @ 0xbffff040
>(XEN) ACPI: DSDT (v001 LHREF LHREF001 0x00000001 INTL 0x02002026) @ 0x00000000
>(XEN) ACPI: Local APIC address 0xfee00000
>(XEN) ACPI: LAPIC (acpi_id[0x01] lapic_id[0x00] enabled)
>(XEN) Processor #0 15:4 APIC version 20
>(XEN) ACPI: LAPIC (acpi_id[0x02] lapic_id[0x06] enabled)
>(XEN) Processor #6 15:4 APIC version 20
>(XEN) ACPI: LAPIC (acpi_id[0x03] lapic_id[0x01] enabled)
>(XEN) Processor #1 15:4 APIC version 20
>(XEN) ACPI: LAPIC (acpi_id[0x04] lapic_id[0x07] enabled)
>(XEN) Processor #7 15:4 APIC version 20
>(XEN) ACPI: LAPIC_NMI (acpi_id[0x01] high edge lint[0x1])
>(XEN) ACPI: LAPIC_NMI (acpi_id[0x02] high edge lint[0x1])
>(XEN) ACPI: LAPIC_NMI (acpi_id[0x03] high edge lint[0x1])
>(XEN) ACPI: LAPIC_NMI (acpi_id[0x04] high edge lint[0x1])
>(XEN) ACPI: IOAPIC (id[0x08] address[0xfec00000] gsi_base[0])
>(XEN) IOAPIC[0]: apic_id 8, version 32, address 0xfec00000, GSI 0-23
>(XEN) ACPI: IOAPIC (id[0x09] address[0xfec10000] gsi_base[24])
>(XEN) IOAPIC[1]: apic_id 9, version 32, address 0xfec10000, GSI 24-47
>(XEN) ACPI: INT_SRC_OVR (bus 0 bus_irq 0 global_irq 2 dfl dfl)
>(XEN) ACPI: INT_SRC_OVR (bus 0 bus_irq 9 global_irq 9 high level)
>(XEN) ACPI: IRQ0 used by override.
>(XEN) ACPI: IRQ2 used by override.
>(XEN) ACPI: IRQ9 used by override.
>(XEN) Enabling APIC mode: Flat. Using 2 I/O APICs
>(XEN) Using ACPI (MADT) for SMP configuration information
>(XEN) Initializing CPU#0
>(XEN) Detected 2793.158 MHz processor.
>(XEN) Using scheduler: Simple EDF Scheduler (sedf)
>(XEN) CPU: Trace cache: 12K uops, L1 D cache: 16K
>(XEN) CPU: L2 cache: 1024K
>(XEN) CPU: Physical Processor ID: 0
>(XEN) CPU0: Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 2.80GHz stepping 01
>(XEN) Booting processor 1/1 eip 90000
>(XEN) Initializing CPU#1
>(XEN) CPU: Trace cache: 12K uops, L1 D cache: 16K
>(XEN) CPU: L2 cache: 1024K
>(XEN) CPU: Physical Processor ID: 0
>(XEN) CPU1: Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 2.80GHz stepping 01
>(XEN) Booting processor 2/6 eip 90000
>(XEN) Initializing CPU#2
>(XEN) CPU: Trace cache: 12K uops, L1 D cache: 16K
>(XEN) CPU: L2 cache: 1024K
>(XEN) CPU: Physical Processor ID: 3
>(XEN) CPU2: Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 2.80GHz stepping 01
>(XEN) Booting processor 3/7 eip 90000
>(XEN) Initializing CPU#3
>(XEN) CPU: Trace cache: 12K uops, L1 D cache: 16K
>(XEN) CPU: L2 cache: 1024K
>(XEN) CPU: Physical Processor ID: 3
>(XEN) CPU3: Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 2.80GHz stepping 01
>(XEN) Total of 4 processors activated.
>(XEN) ENABLING IO-APIC IRQs
>(XEN) ..TIMER: vector=0x31 pin1=2 pin2=-1
>(XEN) checking TSC synchronization across 4 CPUs: passed.
>(XEN) Platform timer is 1.193MHz PIT
>(XEN) Brought up 4 CPUs
>(XEN) mtrr: v2.0 (20020519)
>(XEN) *** LOADING DOMAIN 0 ***
>(XEN) Xen-ELF header found: 'GUEST_OS=linux,GUEST_VER=2.6,XEN_VER=3.0,VIRT_BASE=0xC0000000,PAE=yes,LOADER=generic'
>(XEN) PHYSICAL MEMORY ARRANGEMENT:
>(XEN) Dom0 alloc.: 0000000007800000->0000000008000000 (30720 pages to be allocated)
>(XEN) VIRTUAL MEMORY ARRANGEMENT:
>(XEN) Loaded kernel: c0100000->c0489de8
>(XEN) Init. ramdisk: c048a000->c048a000
>(XEN) Phys-Mach map: c048a000->c04aa000
>(XEN) Start info: c04aa000->c04ab000
>(XEN) Page tables: c04ab000->c04b4000
>(XEN) Boot stack: c04b4000->c04b5000
>(XEN) TOTAL: c0000000->c0800000
>(XEN) ENTRY ADDRESS: c0100000
>(XEN) Scrubbing Free RAM: ........................................................................done.
>(XEN) Xen trace buffers: disabled
>(XEN) *** Serial input -> DOM0 (type 'CTRL-a' three times to switch input to Xen).
>(XEN) Domain 2 (vcpu#0) crashed on cpu#1:
>(XEN) CPU: 1
>(XEN) EIP: e019:[<c0115198>]
>(XEN) EFLAGS: 00000246 CONTEXT: guest
>(XEN) eax: 00000000 ebx: 00000000 ecx: 00000000 edx: 00000000
>(XEN) esi: 00000000 edi: 00000000 ebp: 00000000 esp: c0321ed0
>(XEN) cr0: 8005003b cr3: 03b9c000
>(XEN) ds: e021 es: e021 fs: 0000 gs: e021 ss: e021 cs: e019
>(XEN) Guest stack trace from esp=c0321ed0:
>(XEN) c0000004 00000003 c0115198 0001e019 00010246 00000000 00000000 00000000
>(XEN) c0000000 c0329aba c4000000 00001000 00000000 c02c0f68 c0321f94 00000000
>(XEN) 00000000 c0800000 c0496020 0002d800 c0329e15 c0496020 0000002b 00000000
>(XEN) c0321fa4 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 0002d800 00000000 00000004
>(XEN) 00000003 c0495018 00000800 00000000 c0495000 00000000 00001000 c032a214
>(XEN) c0495000 c0294a8d 00000001 00001000 c031f880 c0294a8d 00000001 c032a51b
>(XEN) c02c0f40 003a1aff c031f880 c0326605 c02bf0ba c0100000 c0326bd8 c0321ff4
>(XEN) c0335f60 00000080 00000000 00000000 ffffe000 c0492000 00000000 ffffe000
>(XEN) c0492000 00000000 00000000 c0322827 c0321ff4 00000000 00000000 00000000
>(XEN) 00000000 c0347ec0 01020800 c0100066
>(XEN) Domain 3 (vcpu#0) crashed on cpu#1:
>(XEN) CPU: 1
>(XEN) EIP: e019:[<c032c627>]
>(XEN) EFLAGS: 00000202 CONTEXT: guest
>(XEN) eax: 00000000 ebx: c1000000 ecx: 001f8008 edx: 00810020
>(XEN) esi: c049b000 edi: c1030000 ebp: 00001000 esp: c0321ed4
>(XEN) cr0: 8005003b cr3: 03b95000
>(XEN) ds: e021 es: e021 fs: 0000 gs: e021 ss: e021 cs: e019
>(XEN) Guest stack trace from esp=c0321ed4:
>(XEN) c1030000 00000003 c032c627 0001e019 00010202 c049b000 0002d800 00001000
>(XEN) 00000023 ffffffff 0000007f 0002d800 00000001 00000811 00000000 01000000
>(XEN) 00000080 00810020 00001000 c032cbf9 c0355e30 00810020 00000080 01000000
>(XEN) c02de780 00000000 c0321f94 c032d374 c02de780 00810020 00000080 01000000
>(XEN) c02de780 c032d3c7 c02de780 00000000 00040800 c031f880 c0294a8d 00000000
>(XEN) c032d41c 00000000 c02de780 c0321f94 00000000 00000000 c032664c c0321f94
>(XEN) 0002d800 00000000 00013000 80000000 c0100000 c0326be2 c0321ff4 c0335f60
>(XEN) 00000080 00000000 00000000 ffffe000 c0492000 00000000 ffffe000 c0492000
>(XEN) 00000000 00000000 c0322827 c0321ff4 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000
>(XEN) c0347ec0 01020800 c0100066
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>Xen-devel mailing list
>Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
>http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: cannot start more than one domU
2005-11-09 15:23 stoeni
2005-11-09 16:04 ` David F Barrera
@ 2005-11-10 20:11 ` stoeni
2005-11-11 18:12 ` Keir Fraser
2005-11-15 23:13 ` stoeni
2 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: stoeni @ 2005-11-10 20:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: xen-devel
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
hi,
i tried the unstable sources from today (7715), with and without smp,
same crashes on an 6GB PAE enabled build.
anything i can contribute?
- --
Tschaw/2,
Stoeni!
++ Please remember: rm -rf means "read mail -really fast" ++
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFDc6lfjhe+lWpwo40RAgDCAKC8/HbARlquyfe0wDzyqH2LN74RkACgmYie
A0fNI2S7uCF2jF0G1pPRiB8=
=8BtA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: cannot start more than one domU
2005-11-10 20:11 ` stoeni
@ 2005-11-11 18:12 ` Keir Fraser
2005-11-11 21:24 ` stoeni
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Keir Fraser @ 2005-11-11 18:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: stoeni; +Cc: xen-devel
On 10 Nov 2005, at 20:11, stoeni wrote:
> i tried the unstable sources from today (7715), with and without smp,
> same crashes on an 6GB PAE enabled build.
>
> anything i can contribute?
Probably now fixed in our staging tree. :-)
Expect the c/s to be in the public repository in an hour or two.
-- Keir
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: cannot start more than one domU
2005-11-11 18:12 ` Keir Fraser
@ 2005-11-11 21:24 ` stoeni
0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: stoeni @ 2005-11-11 21:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Keir Fraser; +Cc: xen-devel
keir,
Keir Fraser schrieb:
> On 10 Nov 2005, at 20:11, stoeni wrote:
>> i tried the unstable sources from today (7715), with and without smp,
>> same crashes on an 6GB PAE enabled build.
>>
>> anything i can contribute?
>
>
> Probably now fixed in our staging tree. :-)
great! you'll get some feedback from me :)
> Expect the c/s to be in the public repository in an hour or two.
i'll try it over the weekend, being a little bit busy these days. should
i submit some traces/debug output (which?) if something crashes again?
--
Tschaw/2,
Stoeni!
++ Please remember: rm -rf means "read mail -really fast" ++
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: cannot start more than one domU
2005-11-09 15:23 stoeni
2005-11-09 16:04 ` David F Barrera
2005-11-10 20:11 ` stoeni
@ 2005-11-15 23:13 ` stoeni
2 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: stoeni @ 2005-11-15 23:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: xen-devel
dear developers,
great, with changeset 7796 i'm now able to boot more than one domain on
x86/32 smp with PAE (6GB) and networking :)
maybe this was fixed earlier but no time to test everydays changeset.
root@xlarge [tmp] # xm list
Name ID Mem(MiB) VCPUs State Time(s)
Domain-0 0 128 1 r----- 18.3
vm-temp 1 1024 1 -b---- 13.3
vm-temp1 2 1024 1 -b---- 12.9
vm-temp2 3 1024 1 -b---- 12.7
xm info shows me 6gb usable ramsize.
i'll check performance/features today, thanks for fixing :)
keep on the good work!!
--
Tschaw/2,
Stoeni!
++ Please remember: rm -rf means "read mail -really fast" ++
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2005-11-15 23:13 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2005-11-09 16:48 cannot start more than one domU Ian Pratt
2005-11-09 16:55 ` David F Barrera
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2005-11-09 16:59 Nakajima, Jun
2005-11-09 17:15 ` David F Barrera
2005-11-09 20:50 ` stoeni
2005-11-09 16:39 Nakajima, Jun
2005-11-09 16:43 ` David F Barrera
2005-11-09 19:42 ` David F Barrera
2005-11-09 15:23 stoeni
2005-11-09 16:04 ` David F Barrera
2005-11-10 20:11 ` stoeni
2005-11-11 18:12 ` Keir Fraser
2005-11-11 21:24 ` stoeni
2005-11-15 23:13 ` stoeni
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.