From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Keir Fraser Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] add_to_physmap: Move the code for XENMEM_add_to_physmap Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2011 19:59:14 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20111120132512.GA31844@aepfle.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20111120132512.GA31844@aepfle.de> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Olaf Hering Cc: allen.m.kay@intel.com, xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, tim@xen.org, Jean Guyader , JBeulich@suse.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 20/11/2011 13:25, "Olaf Hering" wrote: > On Sat, Nov 19, Keir Fraser wrote: > >> On 19/11/2011 21:58, "Olaf Hering" wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Nov 16, Jean Guyader wrote: >>> >>>> Move the code for the XENMEM_add_to_physmap case into it's own >>>> function (xenmem_add_to_physmap). >>> >>> This changeset 24163:7a9a1261a6b0 seems to cause the current testsuite >>> failures. >>> (XEN) Assertion '!in_atomic()' failed at softirq.c:61 >>> >>> preempt_count is like fffffc52 or fffffc00 in my testing. >> >> Thanks, hopefully fixed by c/s 24167. > > Yes, the ASSERT does not trigger anymore. > > The remaining issue is this: > > Nov 20 06:21:11.744519 (XEN) hvm.c:2312:d1 guest attempted write to read-only > memory page. gfn=0xc0, mfn=0x201979 Is that new behaviour? It may be unrelated to whatever HVM test failure we're seeing, or else be a mere symptom of a guest gone haywire for other reasons (we write-protect that memory range because it is supposed to be ROM). -- Keir > See > http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~xensrcts/logs/9893/test-amd64-i386-rhel6hvm > -amd/serial-potato-beetle.log > > Olaf