Re: Fwd: domU lenny not working: BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at e7437cc0

[Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>]

Sally-Anne Edwards wrote:
> Re-sending, because Gmail sent the original as HTML and the list rejected it
>
> xm-debian.cfg from http://people.debian.org/~joeyh/d-i/images/daily
> (24/08/08), options selected (ignoring the comments and the code at
> the bottom):
>
> memory = 256
> name = "debtest1"
> vif = ['bridge=eth0']
> disk = ['phy:/dev/mapper/VolGroup00-debtest1,xvda,w']
>
> domU started like this:
>
> xm create -c xm-debtest1.cfg install=true
> install-installer=http://people.debian.org/~joeyh/d-i/images/daily
>
> The error:
>   

Does this happen consistently, or is it a one-off?

>   ┌───────────────┤ Detecting disks and all other hardware ├────────────────┐
>   │                                                                         │
>   │                                    0%                                   │
>   │                                                                         │
>   │ [   97.520018] BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at e7437cc0  │
> [   97.520018] IP: [<d0837767>] :xen_blkfront:blkif_interrupt+0x5d/0x18a    │
> [   97.520018] Oops: 0000 [#1] SMP ─────────────────────────────────────────┘
> [   97.520018] Modules linked in: xen_blkfront(+) rsrc_nonstatic
> pcmcia_core thermal_sys xen_netfront
> [   97.520018]
> [   97.520018] Pid: 475, comm: klogd Not tainted (2.6.26-1-686-bigmem #1)
> [   97.520018] EIP: 0061:[<d0837767>] EFLAGS: 00010807 CPU: 0
> [   97.520018] EIP is at blkif_interrupt+0x5d/0x18a [xen_blkfront]
> [   97.520018] EAX: 18009c00 EBX: cf42e000 ECX: 00000200 EDX: 00000200
> [   97.520018] ESI: 00000000 EDI: cd4fe0ac EBP: ca000100 ESP: ce411f2c
> [   97.520018]  DS: 007b ES: 007b FS: 00d8 GS: 0033 SS: 0069
> [   97.520018] Process klogd (pid: 475, ti=ce410000 task=cfc60140
> task.ti=ce410000)
> [   97.520018] Stack: c01043ca 00000001 00000002 00000200 c14efd00
> 00000001 cfdfaaa0 00000000
> [   97.520018]        00000000 00000007 c0158c36 c0386ec0 00000007
> 00000000 c0386ef0 c0159ed5
> [   97.520018]        000002a0 c0386ec0 00000000 00000007 c010afd2
> 00000000 00000001 fffffffe
> [   97.520018] Call Trace:
> [   97.520018]  [<c01043ca>] xen_mc_flush+0x118/0x13b
> [   97.520018]  [<c0158c36>] handle_IRQ_event+0x23/0x51
> [   97.520018]  [<c0159ed5>] handle_level_irq+0x73/0xb6
> [   97.520018]  [<c010afd2>] do_IRQ+0x4d/0x63
> [   97.520018]  [<c022d350>] xen_evtchn_do_upcall+0x8b/0xf1
> [   97.520018]  [<c0109543>] xen_do_upcall+0x7/0xc
> [   97.520018]  =======================
> [   97.520018] Code: 8b 43 1c 89 44 24 04 89 44 24 14 e9 e2 00 00 00
> 8b 43 20 31 f6 48 23 44 24 04 6b c0 6c 8d 78 40 03 7b 24 8b 2f 69 c5
> 9c 00 00 00 <8b> 94 18 c0 00 00 00 8d 44 18 54 89 44 24 10 89 14 24 eb
> 12 8b
> [   97.520018] EIP: [<d0837767>] blkif_interrupt+0x5d/0x18a
>   

I haven't see this oops before, but I think the code in question
correlates to:

	bret = RING_GET_RESPONSE(&info->ring, i);
	id   = bret->id;
	req  = (struct request *)info->shadow[id].request;

which suggests the backend driver is passing back a bogus request ID.

What's your host environment?

    J