From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ben Guthro Subject: Re: XSAVE/XRSTOR crash resurgence in 4.3 Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2013 10:42:29 -0400 Message-ID: <1344752101264964129@unknownmsgid> References: <51D592E502000078000E2C7D@nat28.tlf.novell.com> <930123250021152322@unknownmsgid> <51D6BC5E02000078000E2F24@nat28.tlf.novell.com> <-6045434008888857231@unknownmsgid> <51D6D4F902000078000E2FB4@nat28.tlf.novell.com> <-3560575408827160717@unknownmsgid> <51DAE7D002000078000E3583@nat28.tlf.novell.com> <51DAEB9602000078000E3596@nat28.tlf.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <51DAEB9602000078000E3596@nat28.tlf.novell.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Jan Beulich Cc: Mark Roddy , Ben Guthro , xen-devel List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Jul 8, 2013, at 10:41 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 08.07.13 at 16:31, Ben Guthro wrote: >> On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 10:24 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>>> On 08.07.13 at 16:13, Ben Guthro wrote: >>>> On Fri, Jul 5, 2013 at 8:58 AM, Ben Guthro wrote: >>>>> On Jul 5, 2013, at 8:15 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 05.07.13 at 14:10, Ben Guthro wrote: >>>>>>> Since I am not in the office today, nor near a machine that I can >>>>>>> access this, I asked someone else to apply and check in this patch, in >>>>>>> the hope that we could get some useful debug info from the weekend >>>>>>> test run. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> However, when he went to test booting a VM with this patch, the host >>>>>>> machine rebooted - presumably a Xen crash. >>>>>> >>>>>> Oops - it's just printing stuff, so I can't immediately see how that >>>>>> would happen. But perhaps a trivial oversight of mine... >>>> >>>> Here's the crash with this patch >>>> I'm continuing to look at it, but if something jumps out at you, >>>> please let me know. >>> >>> Quite obvious: hvm_guest_x86_mode() has this assertion. Yet >>> the original, supposedly working patch had a use of this too iirc. >> >> It did...which is worrying. >> >> One difference here, is that 4.2 is running in debug=n mode, where 4.3 >> is debug=y >> >> iirc, asserts are disabled on debug=n builds. > > Oh, right. And in the context here the assertion triggering is > apparently wrong anyway. For the purpose of debugging the > issue at hand, I think it is safe to comment it out. Ok, I'll do that, thanks > > But then again I thought you had assertions always enabled in > XenServer. This is in XenClient It is perhaps something to consider doing > > Jan >