From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Boris Ostrovsky Subject: Re: BUG at drivers/xen/balloon.c:353 Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2013 12:52:19 -0400 Message-ID: <522F4E43.1070206@oracle.com> References: <21039.17672.706592.981878@mariner.uk.xensource.com> <522F4926.3020209@citrix.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <522F4926.3020209@citrix.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: David Vrabel Cc: Ian Jackson , xen-devel@lists.xen.org List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 09/10/2013 12:30 PM, David Vrabel wrote: > On 10/09/13 17:12, Ian Jackson wrote: >> Now that we are on Linux 3.4.y, I am once again trying to commission >> my pair of weevils. Things are better than they were but it's still >> totally broken. >> >> Below you can see the logs from my adhoc osstest flight 19169. I >> looked at one of the save/restore failures (test-amd64-i386-xl) and >> see this: >> >> Sep 10 00:03:09.073066 [ 240.142970] kernel BUG at drivers/xen/balloon.c:353! >> >> I'd appreciate any help available with debugging this. The logs are >> here: >> >> http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~xensrcts/logs/19169/test-amd64-i386-xl/info.html >> >> I looked at the code in balloon.c: >> >> BUG_ON(!xen_feature(XENFEAT_auto_translated_physmap) && >> phys_to_machine_mapping_valid(pfn)); >> >> Ian. >> >> Sep 10 00:03:08.629133 [ 240.142955] ------------[ cut here ]------------ >> Sep 10 00:03:09.073066 [ 240.142970] kernel BUG at drivers/xen/balloon.c:353! >> Sep 10 00:03:09.073102 [ 240.142974] invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP >> Sep 10 00:03:09.081064 [ 240.142978] Modules linked in: xen_acpi_processor xen_gntalloc ext4 jbd2 mbcache e1000e >> Sep 10 00:03:09.093059 [ 240.142987] CPU: 6 PID: 847 Comm: kworker/6:1 Not tainted 3.11.0+ #1 > There's a know bug in this area with 3.11+ (3.12-rc0) and there is > pending pull request for the fix. If you are thinking about preempt count bug then its' likely a different one. -boris > > I am a bit confused by the reference to 3.4.y above. Is this BUG in a > guest running 3.11+ on a host with 3.4.y as dom0? Or have you > accidentally installed 3.11+ as your dom0 kernel? > > David > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-devel mailing list > Xen-devel@lists.xen.org > http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel