From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/mm/shadow: spurious warning when
 unmapping xenheap pages.
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2013 11:40:23 +0100
Message-ID: <515EAA17.7050609@citrix.com>
References: <1364466950-15682-1-git-send-email-tim@xen.org>
	<515EA35702000078000CACA9@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
	<20130405083050.GA55764@ocelot.phlegethon.org>
	<515EA95E02000078000CACCF@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
	<20130405084602.GB55764@ocelot.phlegethon.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <20130405084602.GB55764@ocelot.phlegethon.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Tim Deegan <tim@xen.org>
Cc: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>, "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 05/04/13 09:46, Tim Deegan wrote:
> At 09:37 +0100 on 05 Apr (1365154638), Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>> On 05.04.13 at 10:30, Tim Deegan <tim@xen.org> wrote:
>>> At 09:11 +0100 on 05 Apr (1365153095), Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>>>> On 28.03.13 at 11:35, Tim Deegan <tim@xen.org> wrote:
>>>>> Xenheap pages will always have an extra typecount, taken in
>>>>> share_xen_page_with_guest(), which doesn't come from a shadow PTE.
>>>>> Adjust the warning in sh_remove_all_mappings() to account for it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Reported-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Tim Deegan <tim@xen.org>
>>>> I suppose this ought to go into 4.2.2 and 4.1.5 as well?
>>> Could do -- it's just suppressing a printk, so not a particularly urgent
>>> fix AFAICT.
>> But the message, if present when inspecting some random log,
>> looks worrying, so getting rid of the false positive is likely going
>> to help assessing the health of systems/guests.
> Sure.  In any case the patch is harmless, so there should be no risk to
> putting it in.
>
> Tim.

The reason I started debugging it was because it is an scary message for
what turns out to be a safe action.

So please backport :)

~Andrew

>
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
> http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel