From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Keir Fraser Subject: Re: Xen-unstable panic: FATAL PAGE FAULT Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2010 10:28:49 +0100 Message-ID: References: <4C7E32A50200007800013A3F@vpn.id2.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4C7E32A50200007800013A3F@vpn.id2.novell.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Jan Beulich , MaoXiaoyun Cc: xen devel List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 01/09/2010 10:01, "Jan Beulich" wrote: >>>> On 01.09.10 at 10:49, Keir Fraser wrote: >> Okay, my next guess then is that we are deleting a chunk from the wrong list >> head. I don't see any check that the adjacent chunks we are considering to >> merge are from the same node and zone. I suppose the zone logic does just >> work as we're dealing with 2**x aligned and sized regions. But, shouldn't >> the merging logic in free_heap_pages be checking that the merging candidate >> is from the same NUMA node? I see I have an ASSERTion later in the same >> function, but it's too weak and wishful I suspect. > > Hmm, we're keeping a page reserved if node boundaries aren't > well aligned (at the end of init_heap_pages()), so that shouldn't > be possible. Oh yes, that ought to be sufficient really. -- Keir