From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge Subject: Re: Re: xen/stable 2.6.32.9 32bit dom0 kernel crashes early on boot Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 16:25:54 -0700 Message-ID: <4BA2B682.6010903@goop.org> References: <20100304195337.GF2761@reaktio.net> <4B90157D.5090900@goop.org> <20100304202316.GG2761@reaktio.net> <20100304202837.GH2761@reaktio.net> <4B902733.4090205@goop.org> <20100305071359.GI2761@reaktio.net> <20100305105101.GS2761@reaktio.net> <20100306150509.GL2580@reaktio.net> <20100308181713.GG4568@phenom.dumpdata.com> <4B96A27E.50906@goop.org> <20100318225953.GD1878@reaktio.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20100318225953.GD1878@reaktio.net> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Pasi_K=E4rkk=E4inen?= Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 03/18/2010 03:59 PM, Pasi K=E4rkk=E4inen wrote: > Should I try using kernel/head_32.S from 2.6.31.6 with 2.6.32.10 dom0 k= ernel? > I have access to the machine in question again on sunday, so I could te= st things then. > =20 It looks like there's no significant difference between them. I'm at a=20 bit of a loss really; "noexec=3Doff" really should have avoided the=20 problem if it is NX. J