* Re: Issue with pv_ops Kernel 2.6.31.6 and Xen [yinghai@kernel.org: [PATCH 01/35] x86: fix sci on ioapic 1]
@ 2010-02-10 15:39 Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2010-02-13 23:12 ` Marcial Rion
0 siblings, 1 reply; 28+ messages in thread
From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk @ 2010-02-10 15:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: xen-devel, marcial.rion
FYI.
----- Forwarded message from Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org> -----
Date: Tue, 09 Feb 2010 11:32:12 -0800
From: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>, stable@kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 01/35] x86: fix sci on ioapic 1
Thomas Renninger <trenn@suse.de> reported on IBM x3330
booting a latest kernel on this machine results in:
PCI: PCI BIOS revision 2.10 entry at 0xfd61c, last bus=1
PCI: Using configuration type 1 for base access bio: create slab <bio-0> at 0
ACPI: SCI (IRQ30) allocation failed
ACPI Exception: AE_NOT_ACQUIRED, Unable to install System Control Interrupt handler (20090903/evevent-161)
ACPI: Unable to start the ACPI Interpreter
Later all kind of devices fail...
and bisect it down to this commit:
commit b9c61b70075c87a8612624736faf4a2de5b1ed30
x86/pci: update pirq_enable_irq() to setup io apic routing
it turns out we need to set irq routing for the sci on ioapic1 early.
-v2: make it work without sparseirq too.
-v3: fix checkpatch.pl warning, and cc to stable
Reported-by: Thomas Renninger <trenn@suse.de>
Bisected-by: Thomas Renninger <trenn@suse.de>
Tested-by: Thomas Renninger <trenn@suse.de>
Signed-off-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
Cc: stable@kernel.org
---
arch/x86/include/asm/io_apic.h | 1 +
arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c | 9 ++++++-
arch/x86/kernel/apic/io_apic.c | 50 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
3 files changed, 59 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/io_apic.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/io_apic.h
index 7c7c16c..5f61f6e 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/io_apic.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/io_apic.h
@@ -160,6 +160,7 @@ extern int io_apic_get_redir_entries(int ioapic);
struct io_apic_irq_attr;
extern int io_apic_set_pci_routing(struct device *dev, int irq,
struct io_apic_irq_attr *irq_attr);
+void setup_IO_APIC_irq_extra(u32 gsi);
extern int (*ioapic_renumber_irq)(int ioapic, int irq);
extern void ioapic_init_mappings(void);
extern void ioapic_insert_resources(void);
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c b/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
index 036d28a..6083bfa 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
@@ -446,6 +446,12 @@ void __init acpi_pic_sci_set_trigger(unsigned int irq, u16 trigger)
int acpi_gsi_to_irq(u32 gsi, unsigned int *irq)
{
*irq = gsi;
+
+#ifdef CONFIG_X86_IO_APIC
+ if (acpi_irq_model == ACPI_IRQ_MODEL_IOAPIC)
+ setup_IO_APIC_irq_extra(gsi);
+#endif
+
return 0;
}
@@ -473,7 +479,8 @@ int acpi_register_gsi(struct device *dev, u32 gsi, int trigger, int polarity)
plat_gsi = mp_register_gsi(dev, gsi, trigger, polarity);
}
#endif
- acpi_gsi_to_irq(plat_gsi, &irq);
+ irq = plat_gsi;
+
return irq;
}
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/apic/io_apic.c b/arch/x86/kernel/apic/io_apic.c
index 75ba3d0..ee2fba1 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/apic/io_apic.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/apic/io_apic.c
@@ -1541,6 +1541,56 @@ static void __init setup_IO_APIC_irqs(void)
}
/*
+ * for the gsit that is not in first ioapic
+ * but could not use acpi_register_gsi()
+ * like some special sci in IBM x3330
+ */
+void setup_IO_APIC_irq_extra(u32 gsi)
+{
+ int apic_id = 0, pin, idx, irq;
+ int node = cpu_to_node(boot_cpu_id);
+ struct irq_desc *desc;
+ struct irq_cfg *cfg;
+
+ /*
+ * Convert 'gsi' to 'ioapic.pin'.
+ */
+ apic_id = mp_find_ioapic(gsi);
+ if (apic_id < 0)
+ return;
+
+ pin = mp_find_ioapic_pin(apic_id, gsi);
+ idx = find_irq_entry(apic_id, pin, mp_INT);
+ if (idx == -1)
+ return;
+
+ irq = pin_2_irq(idx, apic_id, pin);
+#ifdef CONFIG_SPARSE_IRQ
+ desc = irq_to_desc(irq);
+ if (desc)
+ return;
+#endif
+ desc = irq_to_desc_alloc_node(irq, node);
+ if (!desc) {
+ printk(KERN_INFO "can not get irq_desc for %d\n", irq);
+ return;
+ }
+
+ cfg = desc->chip_data;
+ add_pin_to_irq_node(cfg, node, apic_id, pin);
+
+ if (test_bit(pin, mp_ioapic_routing[apic_id].pin_programmed)) {
+ pr_debug("Pin %d-%d already programmed\n",
+ mp_ioapics[apic_id].apicid, pin);
+ return;
+ }
+ set_bit(pin, mp_ioapic_routing[apic_id].pin_programmed);
+
+ setup_IO_APIC_irq(apic_id, pin, irq, desc,
+ irq_trigger(idx), irq_polarity(idx));
+}
+
+/*
* Set up the timer pin, possibly with the 8259A-master behind.
*/
static void __init setup_timer_IRQ0_pin(unsigned int apic_id, unsigned int pin,
--
1.6.4.2
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
----- End forwarded message -----
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: Issue with pv_ops Kernel 2.6.31.6 and Xen [yinghai@kernel.org: [PATCH 01/35] x86: fix sci on ioapic 1]
2010-02-10 15:39 Issue with pv_ops Kernel 2.6.31.6 and Xen [yinghai@kernel.org: [PATCH 01/35] x86: fix sci on ioapic 1] Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
@ 2010-02-13 23:12 ` Marcial Rion
2010-02-16 18:10 ` SOLVED: " Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
0 siblings, 1 reply; 28+ messages in thread
From: Marcial Rion @ 2010-02-13 23:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk, xen-devel
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> FYI.
>
> ----- Forwarded message from Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org> -----
>
> Date: Tue, 09 Feb 2010 11:32:12 -0800
> From: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
> To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
> "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
> Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
> Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
> Cc: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>,
> Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>,
> linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
> Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>, stable@kernel.org
> Subject: [PATCH 01/35] x86: fix sci on ioapic 1
>
> Thomas Renninger <trenn@suse.de> reported on IBM x3330
>
> booting a latest kernel on this machine results in:
>
> PCI: PCI BIOS revision 2.10 entry at 0xfd61c, last bus=1
> PCI: Using configuration type 1 for base access bio: create slab <bio-0> at 0
> ACPI: SCI (IRQ30) allocation failed
> ACPI Exception: AE_NOT_ACQUIRED, Unable to install System Control Interrupt handler (20090903/evevent-161)
> ACPI: Unable to start the ACPI Interpreter
>
> Later all kind of devices fail...
>
> and bisect it down to this commit:
> commit b9c61b70075c87a8612624736faf4a2de5b1ed30
>
> x86/pci: update pirq_enable_irq() to setup io apic routing
>
> it turns out we need to set irq routing for the sci on ioapic1 early.
>
Yes, this did the trick. Introduced the code changes manually in the
kernel tree, and now, networking is available (see also output of
/proc/interrupts).
xen ~ # cat /proc/interrupts
CPU0 CPU1
1: 8 0 xen-pirq-ioapic-edge i8042
4: 1 0 xen-pirq-ioapic-edge
6: 3 0 xen-pirq-ioapic-edge floppy
8: 2 0 xen-pirq-ioapic-edge rtc0
12: 110 0 xen-pirq-ioapic-edge i8042
14: 14559 0 xen-pirq-ioapic-edge ide0
15: 56 0 xen-pirq-ioapic-edge ide1
19: 17492 0 xen-pirq-ioapic-level uhci_hcd:usb1, peth0
20: 0 0 IO-APIC-fasteoi acpi
408: 0 0 xen-dyn-event evtchn:xenstored
409: 45 0 xen-dyn-event evtchn:xenstored
410: 0 0 xen-dyn-virq hvc_console
411: 74 0 xen-dyn-event xenbus
412: 0 346 xen-dyn-ipi callfuncsingle1
413: 0 0 xen-dyn-virq debug1
414: 0 0 xen-dyn-ipi callfunc1
415: 0 12160 xen-dyn-ipi resched1
416: 0 2517 xen-dyn-ipi spinlock1
417: 0 112999 xen-dyn-virq timer1
418: 437 0 xen-dyn-ipi callfuncsingle0
419: 0 0 xen-dyn-virq debug0
420: 0 0 xen-dyn-ipi callfunc0
421: 4950 0 xen-dyn-ipi resched0
422: 1983 0 xen-dyn-ipi spinlock0
423: 112722 0 xen-dyn-virq timer0
NMI: 0 0 Non-maskable interrupts
LOC: 0 0 Local timer interrupts
SPU: 0 0 Spurious interrupts
CNT: 0 0 Performance counter interrupts
PND: 0 0 Performance pending work
RES: 4950 12160 Rescheduling interrupts
CAL: 437 346 Function call interrupts
TLB: 0 0 TLB shootdowns
TRM: 0 0 Thermal event interrupts
THR: 0 0 Threshold APIC interrupts
MCE: 0 0 Machine check exceptions
MCP: 1 1 Machine check polls
ERR: 0
MIS: 0
Question: Is it known when this piece of code will be introduced in the
"pv_ops Kernel tree"?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* SOLVED: Re: Issue with pv_ops Kernel 2.6.31.6 and Xen [yinghai@kernel.org: [PATCH 01/35] x86: fix sci on ioapic 1]
2010-02-13 23:12 ` Marcial Rion
@ 2010-02-16 18:10 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2010-02-16 21:51 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
0 siblings, 1 reply; 28+ messages in thread
From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk @ 2010-02-16 18:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Marcial Rion, Jeremy Fitzhardinge; +Cc: xen-devel
On Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 12:12:30AM +0100, Marcial Rion wrote:
> Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > FYI.
> >
> > ----- Forwarded message from Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org> -----
> >
> > Date: Tue, 09 Feb 2010 11:32:12 -0800
> > From: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
> > To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
> > "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
> > Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
> > Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
> > Cc: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>,
> > Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>,
> > linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
> > Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>, stable@kernel.org
> > Subject: [PATCH 01/35] x86: fix sci on ioapic 1
> >
> > Thomas Renninger <trenn@suse.de> reported on IBM x3330
> >
> > booting a latest kernel on this machine results in:
> >
> > PCI: PCI BIOS revision 2.10 entry at 0xfd61c, last bus=1
> > PCI: Using configuration type 1 for base access bio: create slab <bio-0> at 0
> > ACPI: SCI (IRQ30) allocation failed
> > ACPI Exception: AE_NOT_ACQUIRED, Unable to install System Control Interrupt handler (20090903/evevent-161)
> > ACPI: Unable to start the ACPI Interpreter
> >
> > Later all kind of devices fail...
> >
> > and bisect it down to this commit:
> > commit b9c61b70075c87a8612624736faf4a2de5b1ed30
> >
> > x86/pci: update pirq_enable_irq() to setup io apic routing
> >
> > it turns out we need to set irq routing for the sci on ioapic1 early.
> >
>
> Yes, this did the trick. Introduced the code changes manually in the
That is great.
.. snip..
> Question: Is it known when this piece of code will be introduced in the
> "pv_ops Kernel tree"?
Hmm.. Jeremy's plans are to re-base the pvops changes that went in
2.6.31.6 onto 2.6.32. The reason being that 2.6.32 has been choosen by
many distributions as their next vehicle for release. The patches being
mostly, if possible, related only to Xen.
The patch I forwarded to you is targetted for 2.6.33 so it would not appear
normally in 2.6.32 tree unles Greg KH choose to back-port it in. Greg is
the maintainer of the 2.6.32 stable tree.
I would recommend you e-mail Greg KH with this e-mail, explain your
situation and ask him if he wouldn't mind merging the patch in.
Thought you might need to do some of the work yourself
(as in, merge the patch in an earlier kernel) - it seems you already
have done this so hopefully that shouldn't be a problem.
Try it that way, as this way also the distributions will pick up the fix
and you would be able to load any new distro on your box without having
to manually recompile the kernel and such.
Then when Jeremy revs up the xen/next tree to next stable rev (I think
he will do this, not sure?), it will automatically be picked up (if Greg picks it up in his tree).
E-mailing Jeremy on this, he might have a better idea.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: SOLVED: Re: Issue with pv_ops Kernel 2.6.31.6 and Xen [yinghai@kernel.org: [PATCH 01/35] x86: fix sci on ioapic 1]
2010-02-16 18:10 ` SOLVED: " Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
@ 2010-02-16 21:51 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2010-02-17 8:33 ` Pasi Kärkkäinen
0 siblings, 1 reply; 28+ messages in thread
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge @ 2010-02-16 21:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk; +Cc: Marcial Rion, xen-devel
On 02/16/2010 10:10 AM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 12:12:30AM +0100, Marcial Rion wrote:
>
>> Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
>>
>>> FYI.
>>>
>>> ----- Forwarded message from Yinghai Lu<yinghai@kernel.org> -----
>>>
>>> Date: Tue, 09 Feb 2010 11:32:12 -0800
>>> From: Yinghai Lu<yinghai@kernel.org>
>>> To: Ingo Molnar<mingo@elte.hu>, Thomas Gleixner<tglx@linutronix.de>,
>>> "H. Peter Anvin"<hpa@zytor.com>,
>>> Andrew Morton<akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
>>> Linus Torvalds<torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
>>> Cc: Jesse Barnes<jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>,
>>> Christoph Lameter<cl@linux-foundation.org>,
>>> linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
>>> Yinghai Lu<yinghai@kernel.org>, stable@kernel.org
>>> Subject: [PATCH 01/35] x86: fix sci on ioapic 1
>>>
>>> Thomas Renninger<trenn@suse.de> reported on IBM x3330
>>>
>>> booting a latest kernel on this machine results in:
>>>
>>> PCI: PCI BIOS revision 2.10 entry at 0xfd61c, last bus=1
>>> PCI: Using configuration type 1 for base access bio: create slab<bio-0> at 0
>>> ACPI: SCI (IRQ30) allocation failed
>>> ACPI Exception: AE_NOT_ACQUIRED, Unable to install System Control Interrupt handler (20090903/evevent-161)
>>> ACPI: Unable to start the ACPI Interpreter
>>>
>>> Later all kind of devices fail...
>>>
>>> and bisect it down to this commit:
>>> commit b9c61b70075c87a8612624736faf4a2de5b1ed30
>>>
>>> x86/pci: update pirq_enable_irq() to setup io apic routing
>>>
>>> it turns out we need to set irq routing for the sci on ioapic1 early.
>>>
>>>
>> Yes, this did the trick. Introduced the code changes manually in the
>>
> That is great.
>
> .. snip..
>
>> Question: Is it known when this piece of code will be introduced in the
>> "pv_ops Kernel tree"?
>>
> Hmm.. Jeremy's plans are to re-base the pvops changes that went in
> 2.6.31.6 onto 2.6.32. The reason being that 2.6.32 has been choosen by
> many distributions as their next vehicle for release. The patches being
> mostly, if possible, related only to Xen.
>
> The patch I forwarded to you is targetted for 2.6.33 so it would not appear
> normally in 2.6.32 tree unles Greg KH choose to back-port it in. Greg is
> the maintainer of the 2.6.32 stable tree.
>
> I would recommend you e-mail Greg KH with this e-mail, explain your
> situation and ask him if he wouldn't mind merging the patch in.
> Thought you might need to do some of the work yourself
> (as in, merge the patch in an earlier kernel) - it seems you already
> have done this so hopefully that shouldn't be a problem.
>
> Try it that way, as this way also the distributions will pick up the fix
> and you would be able to load any new distro on your box without having
> to manually recompile the kernel and such.
>
Is that one change enough to fix the reported problem? Can we just
cherry-pick it over? Or does it need a lot of supporting patches?
> Then when Jeremy revs up the xen/next tree to next stable rev (I think
> he will do this, not sure?), it will automatically be picked up (if Greg picks it up in his tree).
>
Yes. At the moment xen/next is based on plain 2.6.32 because that is
also an ancestor version of mainline git development. Once the 2.6.32
tree basically works (which should be close), then I can merge all the
stable branch changes onto it and call it "xen/stable" or something.
J
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: SOLVED: Re: Issue with pv_ops Kernel 2.6.31.6 and Xen [yinghai@kernel.org: [PATCH 01/35] x86: fix sci on ioapic 1]
2010-02-16 21:51 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
@ 2010-02-17 8:33 ` Pasi Kärkkäinen
2010-02-17 11:56 ` M A Young
2010-02-17 18:52 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
0 siblings, 2 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: Pasi Kärkkäinen @ 2010-02-17 8:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge; +Cc: Marcial Rion, xen-devel, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 01:51:05PM -0800, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>>
>>> Question: Is it known when this piece of code will be introduced in the
>>> "pv_ops Kernel tree"?
>>>
>> Hmm.. Jeremy's plans are to re-base the pvops changes that went in
>> 2.6.31.6 onto 2.6.32. The reason being that 2.6.32 has been choosen by
>> many distributions as their next vehicle for release. The patches being
>> mostly, if possible, related only to Xen.
>>
>> The patch I forwarded to you is targetted for 2.6.33 so it would not appear
>> normally in 2.6.32 tree unles Greg KH choose to back-port it in. Greg is
>> the maintainer of the 2.6.32 stable tree.
>>
>> I would recommend you e-mail Greg KH with this e-mail, explain your
>> situation and ask him if he wouldn't mind merging the patch in.
>> Thought you might need to do some of the work yourself
>> (as in, merge the patch in an earlier kernel) - it seems you already
>> have done this so hopefully that shouldn't be a problem.
>>
>> Try it that way, as this way also the distributions will pick up the fix
>> and you would be able to load any new distro on your box without having
>> to manually recompile the kernel and such.
>>
>
> Is that one change enough to fix the reported problem? Can we just
> cherry-pick it over? Or does it need a lot of supporting patches?
>
>> Then when Jeremy revs up the xen/next tree to next stable rev (I think
>> he will do this, not sure?), it will automatically be picked up (if Greg picks it up in his tree).
>>
>
> Yes. At the moment xen/next is based on plain 2.6.32 because that is
> also an ancestor version of mainline git development. Once the 2.6.32
> tree basically works (which should be close), then I can merge all the
> stable branch changes onto it and call it "xen/stable" or something.
>
So that means I should try xen/next now? :)
-- Pasi
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: SOLVED: Re: Issue with pv_ops Kernel 2.6.31.6 and Xen [yinghai@kernel.org: [PATCH 01/35] x86: fix sci on ioapic 1]
2010-02-17 8:33 ` Pasi Kärkkäinen
@ 2010-02-17 11:56 ` M A Young
2010-02-17 18:53 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2010-02-17 18:52 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
1 sibling, 1 reply; 28+ messages in thread
From: M A Young @ 2010-02-17 11:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pasi Kärkkäinen
Cc: Marcial Rion, Jeremy Fitzhardinge, xen-devel, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
[-- Attachment #1: Type: TEXT/PLAIN, Size: 1263 bytes --]
On Wed, 17 Feb 2010, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 01:51:05PM -0800, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>> Yes. At the moment xen/next is based on plain 2.6.32 because that is
>> also an ancestor version of mainline git development. Once the 2.6.32
>> tree basically works (which should be close), then I can merge all the
>> stable branch changes onto it and call it "xen/stable" or something.
>>
>
> So that means I should try xen/next now? :)
I wouldn't recommend it yet. I have been trying it, but I haven't yet got
it to boot, and my most recent attempt a couple of days ago didn't even
build (the errors were
drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_probe.c: In function 'exists_connecting_device':
drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_probe.c:791: error: 'xenbus_frontend' undeclared
(first use in this function)
drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_probe.c:791: error: (Each undeclared identifier
is reported only once
drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_probe.c:791: error: for each function it appears
in.)
drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_probe.c: In function 'wait_for_devices':
drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_probe.c:863: error: 'xenbus_frontend' undeclared
(first use in this function)
make[3]: *** [drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_probe.o] Error 1
Michael Young
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 138 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: SOLVED: Re: Issue with pv_ops Kernel 2.6.31.6 and Xen [yinghai@kernel.org: [PATCH 01/35] x86: fix sci on ioapic 1]
2010-02-17 8:33 ` Pasi Kärkkäinen
2010-02-17 11:56 ` M A Young
@ 2010-02-17 18:52 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2010-02-17 19:07 ` Michael D Labriola
2010-02-20 15:29 ` xen/next Linux 2.6.32 pv_ops dom0 kernel Pasi Kärkkäinen
1 sibling, 2 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge @ 2010-02-17 18:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pasi Kärkkäinen; +Cc: Marcial Rion, xen-devel, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
On 02/17/2010 12:33 AM, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 01:51:05PM -0800, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Question: Is it known when this piece of code will be introduced in the
>>>> "pv_ops Kernel tree"?
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Hmm.. Jeremy's plans are to re-base the pvops changes that went in
>>> 2.6.31.6 onto 2.6.32. The reason being that 2.6.32 has been choosen by
>>> many distributions as their next vehicle for release. The patches being
>>> mostly, if possible, related only to Xen.
>>>
>>> The patch I forwarded to you is targetted for 2.6.33 so it would not appear
>>> normally in 2.6.32 tree unles Greg KH choose to back-port it in. Greg is
>>> the maintainer of the 2.6.32 stable tree.
>>>
>>> I would recommend you e-mail Greg KH with this e-mail, explain your
>>> situation and ask him if he wouldn't mind merging the patch in.
>>> Thought you might need to do some of the work yourself
>>> (as in, merge the patch in an earlier kernel) - it seems you already
>>> have done this so hopefully that shouldn't be a problem.
>>>
>>> Try it that way, as this way also the distributions will pick up the fix
>>> and you would be able to load any new distro on your box without having
>>> to manually recompile the kernel and such.
>>>
>>>
>> Is that one change enough to fix the reported problem? Can we just
>> cherry-pick it over? Or does it need a lot of supporting patches?
>>
>>
>>> Then when Jeremy revs up the xen/next tree to next stable rev (I think
>>> he will do this, not sure?), it will automatically be picked up (if Greg picks it up in his tree).
>>>
>>>
>> Yes. At the moment xen/next is based on plain 2.6.32 because that is
>> also an ancestor version of mainline git development. Once the 2.6.32
>> tree basically works (which should be close), then I can merge all the
>> stable branch changes onto it and call it "xen/stable" or something.
>>
>>
> So that means I should try xen/next now? :)
>
Give it a go. It boots OK for me, and I can start xend. But I get
domains hanging in pvgrub; I'm not sure blkback is working properly. Or
it could be a tools issue...
J
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: SOLVED: Re: Issue with pv_ops Kernel 2.6.31.6 and Xen [yinghai@kernel.org: [PATCH 01/35] x86: fix sci on ioapic 1]
2010-02-17 11:56 ` M A Young
@ 2010-02-17 18:53 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2010-02-17 22:35 ` M A Young
0 siblings, 1 reply; 28+ messages in thread
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge @ 2010-02-17 18:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: M A Young; +Cc: Marcial Rion, xen-devel, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
On 02/17/2010 03:56 AM, M A Young wrote:
> I wouldn't recommend it yet. I have been trying it, but I haven't yet
> got it to boot, and my most recent attempt a couple of days ago didn't
> even build (the errors were
>
> drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_probe.c: In function
> 'exists_connecting_device':
> drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_probe.c:791: error: 'xenbus_frontend'
> undeclared (first use in this function)
> drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_probe.c:791: error: (Each undeclared
> identifier is reported only once
> drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_probe.c:791: error: for each function it
> appears in.)
> drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_probe.c: In function 'wait_for_devices':
> drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_probe.c:863: error: 'xenbus_frontend'
> undeclared (first use in this function)
> make[3]: *** [drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_probe.o] Error 1
I've fixed that since then. It really is a WIP is branch.
J
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: SOLVED: Re: Issue with pv_ops Kernel 2.6.31.6 and Xen [yinghai@kernel.org: [PATCH 01/35] x86: fix sci on ioapic 1]
2010-02-17 18:52 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
@ 2010-02-17 19:07 ` Michael D Labriola
2010-02-17 19:20 ` Pasi Kärkkäinen
2010-02-17 19:34 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2010-02-20 15:29 ` xen/next Linux 2.6.32 pv_ops dom0 kernel Pasi Kärkkäinen
1 sibling, 2 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: Michael D Labriola @ 2010-02-17 19:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge
Cc: Marcial Rion, xen-devel-bounces, xen-devel, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com wrote on 02/17/2010 01:52:40 PM:
> On 02/17/2010 12:33 AM, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 01:51:05PM -0800, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> >
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Question: Is it known when this piece of code will be introduced in
the
> >>>> "pv_ops Kernel tree"?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> Hmm.. Jeremy's plans are to re-base the pvops changes that went in
> >>> 2.6.31.6 onto 2.6.32. The reason being that 2.6.32 has been choosen
by
> >>> many distributions as their next vehicle for release. The patches
being
> >>> mostly, if possible, related only to Xen.
> >>>
> >>> The patch I forwarded to you is targetted for 2.6.33 so it wouldnot
appear
> >>> normally in 2.6.32 tree unles Greg KH choose to back-port it in.
Greg is
> >>> the maintainer of the 2.6.32 stable tree.
> >>>
> >>> I would recommend you e-mail Greg KH with this e-mail, explain your
> >>> situation and ask him if he wouldn't mind merging the patch in.
> >>> Thought you might need to do some of the work yourself
> >>> (as in, merge the patch in an earlier kernel) - it seems you already
> >>> have done this so hopefully that shouldn't be a problem.
> >>>
> >>> Try it that way, as this way also the distributions will pick up the
fix
> >>> and you would be able to load any new distro on your box without
having
> >>> to manually recompile the kernel and such.
> >>>
> >>>
> >> Is that one change enough to fix the reported problem? Can we just
> >> cherry-pick it over? Or does it need a lot of supporting patches?
> >>
> >>
> >>> Then when Jeremy revs up the xen/next tree to next stable rev (I
think
> >>> he will do this, not sure?), it will automatically be picked up
> (if Greg picks it up in his tree).
> >>>
> >>>
> >> Yes. At the moment xen/next is based on plain 2.6.32 because that is
> >> also an ancestor version of mainline git development. Once the
2.6.32
> >> tree basically works (which should be close), then I can merge all
the
> >> stable branch changes onto it and call it "xen/stable" or something.
> >>
> >>
> > So that means I should try xen/next now? :)
> >
>
> Give it a go. It boots OK for me, and I can start xend. But I get
> domains hanging in pvgrub; I'm not sure blkback is working properly. Or
> it could be a tools issue...
Does this require Xen 4.0-rc or can I do some testing using my 3.4.2
installs?
-Mike
---
Michael D Labriola
Electric Boat
mlabriol@gdeb.com
401-848-8871 (desk)
401-848-8513 (lab)
401-316-9844 (cell)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: SOLVED: Re: Issue with pv_ops Kernel 2.6.31.6 and Xen [yinghai@kernel.org: [PATCH 01/35] x86: fix sci on ioapic 1]
2010-02-17 19:07 ` Michael D Labriola
@ 2010-02-17 19:20 ` Pasi Kärkkäinen
2010-02-17 19:36 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2010-02-17 19:34 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
1 sibling, 1 reply; 28+ messages in thread
From: Pasi Kärkkäinen @ 2010-02-17 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Michael D Labriola
Cc: Marcial Rion, Jeremy Fitzhardinge, xen-devel, xen-devel-bounces,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 02:07:03PM -0500, Michael D Labriola wrote:
> xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com wrote on 02/17/2010 01:52:40 PM:
>
> > On 02/17/2010 12:33 AM, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> > > On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 01:51:05PM -0800, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> > >
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>> Question: Is it known when this piece of code will be introduced in
> the
> > >>>> "pv_ops Kernel tree"?
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>> Hmm.. Jeremy's plans are to re-base the pvops changes that went in
> > >>> 2.6.31.6 onto 2.6.32. The reason being that 2.6.32 has been choosen
> by
> > >>> many distributions as their next vehicle for release. The patches
> being
> > >>> mostly, if possible, related only to Xen.
> > >>>
> > >>> The patch I forwarded to you is targetted for 2.6.33 so it wouldnot
> appear
> > >>> normally in 2.6.32 tree unles Greg KH choose to back-port it in.
> Greg is
> > >>> the maintainer of the 2.6.32 stable tree.
> > >>>
> > >>> I would recommend you e-mail Greg KH with this e-mail, explain your
> > >>> situation and ask him if he wouldn't mind merging the patch in.
> > >>> Thought you might need to do some of the work yourself
> > >>> (as in, merge the patch in an earlier kernel) - it seems you already
> > >>> have done this so hopefully that shouldn't be a problem.
> > >>>
> > >>> Try it that way, as this way also the distributions will pick up the
> fix
> > >>> and you would be able to load any new distro on your box without
> having
> > >>> to manually recompile the kernel and such.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >> Is that one change enough to fix the reported problem? Can we just
> > >> cherry-pick it over? Or does it need a lot of supporting patches?
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>> Then when Jeremy revs up the xen/next tree to next stable rev (I
> think
> > >>> he will do this, not sure?), it will automatically be picked up
> > (if Greg picks it up in his tree).
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >> Yes. At the moment xen/next is based on plain 2.6.32 because that is
> > >> also an ancestor version of mainline git development. Once the
> 2.6.32
> > >> tree basically works (which should be close), then I can merge all
> the
> > >> stable branch changes onto it and call it "xen/stable" or something.
> > >>
> > >>
> > > So that means I should try xen/next now? :)
> > >
> >
> > Give it a go. It boots OK for me, and I can start xend. But I get
> > domains hanging in pvgrub; I'm not sure blkback is working properly. Or
>
> > it could be a tools issue...
>
> Does this require Xen 4.0-rc or can I do some testing using my 3.4.2
> installs?
>
I believe xen/next uses the new APIC setup stuff, so it requires Xen 4.0.0
hypervisor. Correct?
iirc earlier there was a patch on xen-devel to support the new APIC stuff with Xen 3.4 hypervisor.
Was it this patch?:
http://xenbits.xen.org/xen-3.4-testing.hg?rev/608ebc959c35
-- Pasi
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: SOLVED: Re: Issue with pv_ops Kernel 2.6.31.6 and Xen [yinghai@kernel.org: [PATCH 01/35] x86: fix sci on ioapic 1]
2010-02-17 19:07 ` Michael D Labriola
2010-02-17 19:20 ` Pasi Kärkkäinen
@ 2010-02-17 19:34 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
1 sibling, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge @ 2010-02-17 19:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Michael D Labriola
Cc: Marcial Rion, xen-devel-bounces, xen-devel, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
On 02/17/2010 11:07 AM, Michael D Labriola wrote:
>> it could be a tools issue...
>>
> Does this require Xen 4.0-rc or can I do some testing using my 3.4.2
> installs?
>
No, the kernel requires Xen 4.0.
J
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: SOLVED: Re: Issue with pv_ops Kernel 2.6.31.6 and Xen [yinghai@kernel.org: [PATCH 01/35] x86: fix sci on ioapic 1]
2010-02-17 19:20 ` Pasi Kärkkäinen
@ 2010-02-17 19:36 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2010-02-17 19:41 ` Pasi Kärkkäinen
0 siblings, 1 reply; 28+ messages in thread
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge @ 2010-02-17 19:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pasi Kärkkäinen
Cc: Marcial Rion, xen-devel-bounces, xen-devel, Michael D Labriola,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
On 02/17/2010 11:20 AM, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> I believe xen/next uses the new APIC setup stuff, so it requires Xen 4.0.0
> hypervisor. Correct?
>
Right.
> iirc earlier there was a patch on xen-devel to support the new APIC stuff with Xen 3.4 hypervisor.
>
> Was it this patch?:
> http://xenbits.xen.org/xen-3.4-testing.hg?rev/608ebc959c35
>
Looks like it. Has that made it into any release versions of 3.4?
J
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: SOLVED: Re: Issue with pv_ops Kernel 2.6.31.6 and Xen [yinghai@kernel.org: [PATCH 01/35] x86: fix sci on ioapic 1]
2010-02-17 19:36 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
@ 2010-02-17 19:41 ` Pasi Kärkkäinen
2010-02-17 19:47 ` Michael D Labriola
0 siblings, 1 reply; 28+ messages in thread
From: Pasi Kärkkäinen @ 2010-02-17 19:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge
Cc: Marcial Rion, xen-devel-bounces, xen-devel, Michael D Labriola,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 11:36:15AM -0800, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> On 02/17/2010 11:20 AM, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
>> I believe xen/next uses the new APIC setup stuff, so it requires Xen 4.0.0
>> hypervisor. Correct?
>>
>
> Right.
>
>> iirc earlier there was a patch on xen-devel to support the new APIC stuff with Xen 3.4 hypervisor.
>>
>> Was it this patch?:
>> http://xenbits.xen.org/xen-3.4-testing.hg?rev/608ebc959c35
>>
>
> Looks like it. Has that made it into any release versions of 3.4?
>
Not yet.. it'll be in 3.4.3.
-- Pasi
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: SOLVED: Re: Issue with pv_ops Kernel 2.6.31.6 and Xen [yinghai@kernel.org: [PATCH 01/35] x86: fix sci on ioapic 1]
2010-02-17 19:41 ` Pasi Kärkkäinen
@ 2010-02-17 19:47 ` Michael D Labriola
2010-02-17 19:55 ` Pasi Kärkkäinen
0 siblings, 1 reply; 28+ messages in thread
From: Michael D Labriola @ 2010-02-17 19:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pasi Kärkkäinen
Cc: Marcial Rion, Jeremy Fitzhardinge, xen-devel, xen-devel-bounces,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com wrote on 02/17/2010 02:41:35 PM:
> On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 11:36:15AM -0800, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> > On 02/17/2010 11:20 AM, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> >> I believe xen/next uses the new APIC setup stuff, so it requires Xen
4.0.0
> >> hypervisor. Correct?
> >>
> >
> > Right.
> >
> >> iirc earlier there was a patch on xen-devel to support the new
> APIC stuff with Xen 3.4 hypervisor.
> >>
> >> Was it this patch?:
> >> http://xenbits.xen.org/xen-3.4-testing.hg?rev/608ebc959c35
> >>
> >
> > Looks like it. Has that made it into any release versions of 3.4?
> >
>
> Not yet.. it'll be in 3.4.3.
Cool. So I can apply that patch to my 3.4 tree, recompile, and test the
xen/next branch...
---
Michael D Labriola
Electric Boat
mlabriol@gdeb.com
401-848-8871 (desk)
401-848-8513 (lab)
401-316-9844 (cell)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: SOLVED: Re: Issue with pv_ops Kernel 2.6.31.6 and Xen [yinghai@kernel.org: [PATCH 01/35] x86: fix sci on ioapic 1]
2010-02-17 19:47 ` Michael D Labriola
@ 2010-02-17 19:55 ` Pasi Kärkkäinen
0 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: Pasi Kärkkäinen @ 2010-02-17 19:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Michael D Labriola
Cc: Marcial Rion, Jeremy Fitzhardinge, xen-devel, xen-devel-bounces,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 02:47:38PM -0500, Michael D Labriola wrote:
> xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com wrote on 02/17/2010 02:41:35 PM:
>
> > On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 11:36:15AM -0800, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> > > On 02/17/2010 11:20 AM, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> > >> I believe xen/next uses the new APIC setup stuff, so it requires Xen
> 4.0.0
> > >> hypervisor. Correct?
> > >>
> > >
> > > Right.
> > >
> > >> iirc earlier there was a patch on xen-devel to support the new
> > APIC stuff with Xen 3.4 hypervisor.
> > >>
> > >> Was it this patch?:
> > >> http://xenbits.xen.org/xen-3.4-testing.hg?rev/608ebc959c35
> > >>
> > >
> > > Looks like it. Has that made it into any release versions of 3.4?
> > >
> >
> > Not yet.. it'll be in 3.4.3.
>
> Cool. So I can apply that patch to my 3.4 tree, recompile, and test the
> xen/next branch...
>
If it doesn't work with 3.4 then just use 4.0.. Jeremy has been using 4.0 for testing.
Also, let us know how it goes. If you grab the latest 3.4.3-rcX
(hg clone http://xenbits.xen.org/xen-3.4-testing.hg) you don't need to patch anything..
-- Pasi
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: SOLVED: Re: Issue with pv_ops Kernel 2.6.31.6 and Xen [yinghai@kernel.org: [PATCH 01/35] x86: fix sci on ioapic 1]
2010-02-17 18:53 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
@ 2010-02-17 22:35 ` M A Young
2010-02-17 22:56 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
0 siblings, 1 reply; 28+ messages in thread
From: M A Young @ 2010-02-17 22:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge; +Cc: Marcial Rion, xen-devel, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
On Wed, 17 Feb 2010, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> On 02/17/2010 03:56 AM, M A Young wrote:
>> I wouldn't recommend it yet. I have been trying it, but I haven't yet got
>> it to boot, and my most recent attempt a couple of days ago didn't even
>> build (the errors were
>>
>> drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_probe.c: In function 'exists_connecting_device':
>> drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_probe.c:791: error: 'xenbus_frontend' undeclared
>> (first use in this function)
>> drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_probe.c:791: error: (Each undeclared identifier
>> is reported only once
>> drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_probe.c:791: error: for each function it appears
>> in.)
>> drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_probe.c: In function 'wait_for_devices':
>> drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_probe.c:863: error: 'xenbus_frontend' undeclared
>> (first use in this function)
>> make[3]: *** [drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_probe.o] Error 1
>
> I've fixed that since then. It really is a WIP is branch.
Are you sure? I have just tried a fresh build and it fails in exactly the
same place.
Michael Young
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: SOLVED: Re: Issue with pv_ops Kernel 2.6.31.6 and Xen [yinghai@kernel.org: [PATCH 01/35] x86: fix sci on ioapic 1]
2010-02-17 22:35 ` M A Young
@ 2010-02-17 22:56 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2010-02-17 23:24 ` M A Young
0 siblings, 1 reply; 28+ messages in thread
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge @ 2010-02-17 22:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: M A Young; +Cc: Marcial Rion, xen-devel, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
On 02/17/2010 02:35 PM, M A Young wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Feb 2010, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>
>> On 02/17/2010 03:56 AM, M A Young wrote:
>>> I wouldn't recommend it yet. I have been trying it, but I haven't
>>> yet got it to boot, and my most recent attempt a couple of days ago
>>> didn't even build (the errors were
>>>
>>> drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_probe.c: In function
>>> 'exists_connecting_device':
>>> drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_probe.c:791: error: 'xenbus_frontend'
>>> undeclared (first use in this function)
>>> drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_probe.c:791: error: (Each undeclared
>>> identifier is reported only once
>>> drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_probe.c:791: error: for each function it
>>> appears in.)
>>> drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_probe.c: In function 'wait_for_devices':
>>> drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_probe.c:863: error: 'xenbus_frontend'
>>> undeclared (first use in this function)
>>> make[3]: *** [drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_probe.o] Error 1
>>
>> I've fixed that since then. It really is a WIP is branch.
>
> Are you sure? I have just tried a fresh build and it fails in exactly
> the same place.
This is on xen/next, change 507288f2bf47dc2b2aed08c7a9c72c7c1dad8bb4?
J
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: SOLVED: Re: Issue with pv_ops Kernel 2.6.31.6 and Xen [yinghai@kernel.org: [PATCH 01/35] x86: fix sci on ioapic 1]
2010-02-17 22:56 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
@ 2010-02-17 23:24 ` M A Young
0 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: M A Young @ 2010-02-17 23:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge; +Cc: Marcial Rion, xen-devel, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
On Wed, 17 Feb 2010, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> On 02/17/2010 02:35 PM, M A Young wrote:
>> On Wed, 17 Feb 2010, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>>
>>> On 02/17/2010 03:56 AM, M A Young wrote:
>>>> I wouldn't recommend it yet. I have been trying it, but I haven't yet got
>>>> it to boot, and my most recent attempt a couple of days ago didn't even
>>>> build (the errors were
>>>>
>>>> drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_probe.c: In function
>>>> 'exists_connecting_device':
>>>> drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_probe.c:791: error: 'xenbus_frontend'
>>>> undeclared (first use in this function)
>>>> drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_probe.c:791: error: (Each undeclared identifier
>>>> is reported only once
>>>> drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_probe.c:791: error: for each function it
>>>> appears in.)
>>>> drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_probe.c: In function 'wait_for_devices':
>>>> drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_probe.c:863: error: 'xenbus_frontend'
>>>> undeclared (first use in this function)
>>>> make[3]: *** [drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_probe.o] Error 1
>>>
>>> I've fixed that since then. It really is a WIP is branch.
>>
>> Are you sure? I have just tried a fresh build and it fails in exactly the
>> same place.
>
> This is on xen/next, change 507288f2bf47dc2b2aed08c7a9c72c7c1dad8bb4?
I thought it was. However having checked my generation process, it
turns out that the offending lines had crept back in during my attempts to
resolve conflicts produced by merging in v2.6.32.8 in git.
Michael Young
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* xen/next Linux 2.6.32 pv_ops dom0 kernel
2010-02-17 18:52 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2010-02-17 19:07 ` Michael D Labriola
@ 2010-02-20 15:29 ` Pasi Kärkkäinen
2010-02-20 19:55 ` Stefan Kuhne
2010-02-22 20:27 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
1 sibling, 2 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: Pasi Kärkkäinen @ 2010-02-20 15:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge; +Cc: Marcial Rion, xen-devel, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 10:52:40AM -0800, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> On 02/17/2010 12:33 AM, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 01:51:05PM -0800, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Question: Is it known when this piece of code will be introduced in the
>>>>> "pv_ops Kernel tree"?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Hmm.. Jeremy's plans are to re-base the pvops changes that went in
>>>> 2.6.31.6 onto 2.6.32. The reason being that 2.6.32 has been choosen by
>>>> many distributions as their next vehicle for release. The patches being
>>>> mostly, if possible, related only to Xen.
>>>>
>>>> The patch I forwarded to you is targetted for 2.6.33 so it would not appear
>>>> normally in 2.6.32 tree unles Greg KH choose to back-port it in. Greg is
>>>> the maintainer of the 2.6.32 stable tree.
>>>>
>>>> I would recommend you e-mail Greg KH with this e-mail, explain your
>>>> situation and ask him if he wouldn't mind merging the patch in.
>>>> Thought you might need to do some of the work yourself
>>>> (as in, merge the patch in an earlier kernel) - it seems you already
>>>> have done this so hopefully that shouldn't be a problem.
>>>>
>>>> Try it that way, as this way also the distributions will pick up the fix
>>>> and you would be able to load any new distro on your box without having
>>>> to manually recompile the kernel and such.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Is that one change enough to fix the reported problem? Can we just
>>> cherry-pick it over? Or does it need a lot of supporting patches?
>>>
>>>
>>>> Then when Jeremy revs up the xen/next tree to next stable rev (I think
>>>> he will do this, not sure?), it will automatically be picked up (if Greg picks it up in his tree).
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Yes. At the moment xen/next is based on plain 2.6.32 because that is
>>> also an ancestor version of mainline git development. Once the 2.6.32
>>> tree basically works (which should be close), then I can merge all the
>>> stable branch changes onto it and call it "xen/stable" or something.
>>>
>>>
>> So that means I should try xen/next now? :)
>>
>
> Give it a go. It boots OK for me, and I can start xend. But I get
> domains hanging in pvgrub; I'm not sure blkback is working properly. Or
> it could be a tools issue...
>
I just tried the latest xen/next 2.6.32 64bit dom0 kernel with Xen 4.0.0-rc4 hypervisor.
It seems to build, boot and work for me.
I'm able to run PV guests without problems!
-- Pasi
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: xen/next Linux 2.6.32 pv_ops dom0 kernel
2010-02-20 15:29 ` xen/next Linux 2.6.32 pv_ops dom0 kernel Pasi Kärkkäinen
@ 2010-02-20 19:55 ` Stefan Kuhne
2010-02-20 20:50 ` Boris Derzhavets
2010-02-21 2:02 ` Pasi Kärkkäinen
2010-02-22 20:27 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
1 sibling, 2 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: Stefan Kuhne @ 2010-02-20 19:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: xen-devel
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 267 bytes --]
Am 20.02.2010 16:29, schrieb Pasi Kärkkäinen:
Hello,
> I just tried the latest xen/next 2.6.32 64bit dom0 kernel with Xen 4.0.0-rc4 hypervisor.
> It seems to build, boot and work for me.
>
i'm new on git.
How can i get xen/next?
Regards,
Stefan Kuhne
[-- Attachment #1.2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 552 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 138 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: xen/next Linux 2.6.32 pv_ops dom0 kernel
2010-02-20 19:55 ` Stefan Kuhne
@ 2010-02-20 20:50 ` Boris Derzhavets
2010-02-20 21:01 ` Boris Derzhavets
2010-02-21 2:02 ` Pasi Kärkkäinen
1 sibling, 1 reply; 28+ messages in thread
From: Boris Derzhavets @ 2010-02-20 20:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: xen-devel
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 885 bytes --]
# git pull
# git checkout origin/xen/next -b xen/next
will switch to from xen/master to xen/next
Make sure what current branch is :-
# git branch
Boris.
--- On Sat, 2/20/10, Stefan Kuhne <stefan.kuhne@gmx.net> wrote:
From: Stefan Kuhne <stefan.kuhne@gmx.net>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] xen/next Linux 2.6.32 pv_ops dom0 kernel
To: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
Date: Saturday, February 20, 2010, 2:55 PM
Am 20.02.2010 16:29, schrieb Pasi Kärkkäinen:
Hello,
> I just tried the latest xen/next 2.6.32 64bit dom0 kernel with Xen 4.0.0-rc4 hypervisor.
> It seems to build, boot and work for me.
>
i'm new on git.
How can i get xen/next?
Regards,
Stefan Kuhne
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 1449 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 138 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: xen/next Linux 2.6.32 pv_ops dom0 kernel
2010-02-20 20:50 ` Boris Derzhavets
@ 2010-02-20 21:01 ` Boris Derzhavets
0 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: Boris Derzhavets @ 2010-02-20 21:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: xen-devel
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5472 bytes --]
Sample:-
[root@fedora linux-2.6-xen]# git pull
remote: Counting objects: 1661, done.
remote: Compressing objects: 100% (597/597), done.
remote: Total 1040 (delta 843), reused 524 (delta 409)
Receiving objects: 100% (1040/1040), 243.06 KiB | 55 KiB/s, done.
Resolving deltas: 100% (843/843), completed with 184 local objects.
>From git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jeremy/xen
f2014f7..523f506 xen/core -> origin/xen/core
* [new branch] xen/dom0/acpi -> origin/xen/dom0/acpi
444c982..ca352dc xen/dom0/acpi-parser -> origin/xen/dom0/acpi-parser
* [new branch] xen/dom0/apic-next -> origin/xen/dom0/apic-next
e762bd5..b5280ed xen/dom0/backend/blkback -> origin/xen/dom0/backend/blkback
e116b21..f0aedbb xen/dom0/backend/blktap2 -> origin/xen/dom0/backend/blktap2
f4685d0..f8a9a00 xen/dom0/backend/core -> origin/xen/dom0/backend/core
a84aa84..c6f55dd xen/dom0/backend/netback -> origin/xen/dom0/backend/netback
33fdaa9..2d2cb9a xen/dom0/gntdev -> origin/xen/dom0/gntdev
* [new branch] xen/dom0/konrad-swiotlb-2.6.32 -> origin/xen/dom0/konrad-swiotlb-2.6.32
7906f14..a36135d xen/dom0/mce -> origin/xen/dom0/mce
29ab662..aa75c0a xen/dom0/pciback -> origin/xen/dom0/pciback
7113308..eebc806 xen/frontend -> origin/xen/frontend
60e0545..733bcb9 xen/master -> origin/xen/master
f251273..ab77527 xen/next -> origin/xen/next
4f3c9d7..7ec723a xen/pcifront -> origin/xen/pcifront
aa228e3..7d9b144 xen/vsyscall -> origin/xen/vsyscall
Updating 60e0545..733bcb9
Fast forward
arch/x86/include/asm/dma-mapping.h | 1 +
arch/x86/include/asm/fixmap.h | 2 +
arch/x86/include/asm/xen/pci.h | 4 +-
arch/x86/include/asm/xen/swiotlb.h | 4 +-
arch/x86/kernel/amd_iommu_init.c | 2 +-
arch/x86/kernel/aperture_64.c | 2 +-
arch/x86/kernel/pci-calgary_64.c | 2 +-
arch/x86/kernel/pci-gart_64.c | 2 +-
arch/x86/kernel/pci-swiotlb.c | 3 +
arch/x86/mm/tlb.c | 2 +
arch/x86/pci/xen.c | 6 ++-
arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c | 3 +-
arch/x86/xen/pci-swiotlb.c | 11 +---
arch/x86/xen/pci.c | 2 +-
drivers/acpi/processor_core.c | 9 +--
drivers/block/xen-blkfront.c | 83 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
drivers/xen/Kconfig | 5 ++
drivers/xen/acpi_processor.c | 10 +++-
drivers/xen/blkback/Makefile | 3 +-
drivers/xen/blkback/blkback-pagemap.c | 7 ++-
drivers/xen/blkback/blkback-pagemap.h | 18 ++++++-
drivers/xen/blkback/blkback.c | 21 +++----
drivers/xen/blkback/common.h | 4 -
drivers/xen/blktap/Makefile | 2 +-
drivers/xen/blktap/blktap.h | 12 ++++-
drivers/xen/blktap/control.c | 3 +-
drivers/xen/blktap/device.c | 98 ++++++++++++++++-----------------
drivers/xen/blktap/request.c | 9 +--
drivers/xen/blktap/ring.c | 2 +-
drivers/xen/blktap/sysfs.c | 6 +-
include/xen/acpi.h | 2 +
include/xen/grant_table.h | 4 +-
mm/memory.c | 1 +
33 files changed, 231 insertions(+), 114 deletions(-)
[root@fedora linux-2.6-xen]# git checkout origin/xen/next -b xen/next
Checking out files: 100% (10334/10334), done.
Branch xen/next set up to track remote branch xen/next from origin.
Switched to a new branch 'xen/next'
--- On Sat, 2/20/10, Boris Derzhavets <bderzhavets@yahoo.com> wrote:
From: Boris Derzhavets <bderzhavets@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] xen/next Linux 2.6.32 pv_ops dom0 kernel
To: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
Date: Saturday, February 20, 2010, 3:50 PM
# git pull
# git checkout origin/xen/next -b xen/next
will switch to from xen/master to xen/next
Make sure what current branch is :-
# git branch
Boris.
--- On Sat, 2/20/10, Stefan Kuhne <stefan.kuhne@gmx.net> wrote:
From: Stefan Kuhne <stefan.kuhne@gmx.net>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] xen/next Linux 2.6.32 pv_ops dom0 kernel
To: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
Date: Saturday, February 20, 2010, 2:55 PM
Am 20.02.2010 16:29, schrieb Pasi Kärkkäinen:
Hello,
> I just tried the latest xen/next 2.6.32 64bit dom0 kernel with Xen 4.0.0-rc4 hypervisor.
> It seems to build, boot and work for me.
>
i'm new on git.
How can i get
xen/next?
Regards,
Stefan Kuhne
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 12101 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 138 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: xen/next Linux 2.6.32 pv_ops dom0 kernel
2010-02-20 19:55 ` Stefan Kuhne
2010-02-20 20:50 ` Boris Derzhavets
@ 2010-02-21 2:02 ` Pasi Kärkkäinen
2010-02-23 18:41 ` Martinx
1 sibling, 1 reply; 28+ messages in thread
From: Pasi Kärkkäinen @ 2010-02-21 2:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: xen-devel
On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 08:55:00PM +0100, Stefan Kuhne wrote:
> Am 20.02.2010 16:29, schrieb Pasi Kärkkäinen:
> Hello,
>
> > I just tried the latest xen/next 2.6.32 64bit dom0 kernel with Xen 4.0.0-rc4 hypervisor.
> > It seems to build, boot and work for me.
> >
> i'm new on git.
> How can i get xen/next?
>
git clone git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jeremy/xen.git linux-2.6-xen
cd linux-2.6-xen
git checkout -m xen/next
git pull
that should do it.
-- Pasi
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: xen/next Linux 2.6.32 pv_ops dom0 kernel
2010-02-20 15:29 ` xen/next Linux 2.6.32 pv_ops dom0 kernel Pasi Kärkkäinen
2010-02-20 19:55 ` Stefan Kuhne
@ 2010-02-22 20:27 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2010-02-22 23:23 ` Pasi Kärkkäinen
1 sibling, 1 reply; 28+ messages in thread
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge @ 2010-02-22 20:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pasi Kärkkäinen
Cc: Marcial Rion, xen-devel, Stefano Stabellini, Samuel Thibault,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
On 02/20/2010 07:29 AM, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> I just tried the latest xen/next 2.6.32 64bit dom0 kernel with Xen 4.0.0-rc4 hypervisor.
> It seems to build, boot and work for me.
>
> I'm able to run PV guests without problems!
>
That's great news.
What's your config? Are you using pvgrub? What are your block and net
devices?
At the very least pvgrub/minios fails in very obscure ways and needs to
give better diagnostics. But there may also be some outright bugs in
there which are triggering non-deterministically...
J
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: xen/next Linux 2.6.32 pv_ops dom0 kernel
2010-02-22 20:27 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
@ 2010-02-22 23:23 ` Pasi Kärkkäinen
2010-02-22 23:34 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
0 siblings, 1 reply; 28+ messages in thread
From: Pasi Kärkkäinen @ 2010-02-22 23:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge
Cc: Marcial Rion, xen-devel, Stefano Stabellini, Samuel Thibault,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 12:27:55PM -0800, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> On 02/20/2010 07:29 AM, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
>> I just tried the latest xen/next 2.6.32 64bit dom0 kernel with Xen 4.0.0-rc4 hypervisor.
>> It seems to build, boot and work for me.
>>
>> I'm able to run PV guests without problems!
>>
>
> That's great news.
>
> What's your config? Are you using pvgrub? What are your block and net
> devices?
>
.config here:
http://pasik.reaktio.net/xen/pv_ops-dom0-debug/config-2.6.32-pvops-dom0-xen-next-x86_64
I was using pygrub, not pvgrub.. also I was using phy: backed LVM volumes,
and just the normal bridged vif configuration.
> At the very least pvgrub/minios fails in very obscure ways and needs to
> give better diagnostics. But there may also be some outright bugs in
> there which are triggering non-deterministically...
>
Ok.. I can try pvgrub after a couple of days when I'm back from travelling
and have access to my testing equipment.
-- Pasi
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: xen/next Linux 2.6.32 pv_ops dom0 kernel
2010-02-22 23:23 ` Pasi Kärkkäinen
@ 2010-02-22 23:34 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
0 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge @ 2010-02-22 23:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pasi Kärkkäinen
Cc: Marcial Rion, xen-devel, Stefano Stabellini, Samuel Thibault,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
On 02/22/2010 03:23 PM, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 12:27:55PM -0800, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>
>> On 02/20/2010 07:29 AM, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
>>
>>> I just tried the latest xen/next 2.6.32 64bit dom0 kernel with Xen 4.0.0-rc4 hypervisor.
>>> It seems to build, boot and work for me.
>>>
>>> I'm able to run PV guests without problems!
>>>
>>>
>> That's great news.
>>
>> What's your config? Are you using pvgrub? What are your block and net
>> devices?
>>
>>
> .config here:
> http://pasik.reaktio.net/xen/pv_ops-dom0-debug/config-2.6.32-pvops-dom0-xen-next-x86_64
>
I meant your Xen config file.
> I was using pygrub, not pvgrub..
Can you get pvgrub working?
> also I was using phy: backed LVM volumes,
>
Try blktap; tap:aio should work.
>> At the very least pvgrub/minios fails in very obscure ways and needs to
>> give better diagnostics. But there may also be some outright bugs in
>> there which are triggering non-deterministically...
>>
>>
> Ok.. I can try pvgrub after a couple of days when I'm back from travelling
> and have access to my testing equipment.
>
Thanks,
J
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: xen/next Linux 2.6.32 pv_ops dom0 kernel
2010-02-21 2:02 ` Pasi Kärkkäinen
@ 2010-02-23 18:41 ` Martinx
2010-02-23 19:07 ` Boris Derzhavets
0 siblings, 1 reply; 28+ messages in thread
From: Martinx @ 2010-02-23 18:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pasi Kärkkäinen; +Cc: xen-devel
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1842 bytes --]
Pasi, look:
*git clone git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jeremy/xen.git
linux-2.6-xen*
Initialized empty Git repository in /usr/src/xen/linux-2.6-xen/.git/
remote: Counting objects: 1427356, done.
remote: Compressing objects: 100% (234218/234218), done.
remote: Total 1427356 (delta 1186822), reused 1420971 (delta 1182249)
Receiving objects: 100% (1427356/1427356), 310.10 MiB | 18 KiB/s, done.
Resolving deltas: 100% (1186822/1186822), done.
Checking out files: 100% (29214/29214), done.
*cd linux-2.6-xen*
*git checkout -m xen/next*
*error: pathspec 'xen/next' did not match any file(s) known to git.*
*git pull*
remote: Counting objects: 78, done.
remote: Compressing objects: 100% (59/59), done.
remote: Total 59 (delta 49), reused 0 (delta 0)
Unpacking objects: 100% (59/59), done.
>From git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jeremy/xen
c6f55dd..37a36aa xen/dom0/backend/netback ->
origin/xen/dom0/backend/netback
ab77527..5c88709 xen/next -> origin/xen/next
Already up-to-date.
Is that right?!
Thanks!
Thiago
On 20 February 2010 23:02, Pasi Kärkkäinen <pasik@iki.fi> wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 08:55:00PM +0100, Stefan Kuhne wrote:
> > Am 20.02.2010 16:29, schrieb Pasi Kärkkäinen:
> > Hello,
> >
> > > I just tried the latest xen/next 2.6.32 64bit dom0 kernel with Xen
> 4.0.0-rc4 hypervisor.
> > > It seems to build, boot and work for me.
> > >
> > i'm new on git.
> > How can i get xen/next?
> >
>
> git clone git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jeremy/xen.gitlinux-2.6-xen
> cd linux-2.6-xen
> git checkout -m xen/next
> git pull
>
> that should do it.
>
> -- Pasi
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
>
[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 2741 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 138 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: xen/next Linux 2.6.32 pv_ops dom0 kernel
2010-02-23 18:41 ` Martinx
@ 2010-02-23 19:07 ` Boris Derzhavets
0 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: Boris Derzhavets @ 2010-02-23 19:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pasi Kärkkäinen, Martinx; +Cc: xen-devel
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2422 bytes --]
Right now :-
# git checkout origin/xen/next -b xen/next
then what ?
--- On Tue, 2/23/10, Martinx <thiagocmartinsc@gmail.com> wrote:
From: Martinx <thiagocmartinsc@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] xen/next Linux 2.6.32 pv_ops dom0 kernel
To: "Pasi Kärkkäinen" <pasik@iki.fi>
Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
Date: Tuesday, February 23, 2010, 1:41 PM
Pasi, look:
git clone git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jeremy/xen.git linux-2.6-xen
Initialized empty Git repository in /usr/src/xen/linux-2.6-xen/.git/
remote: Counting objects: 1427356, done.
remote: Compressing objects: 100% (234218/234218), done.
remote: Total 1427356 (delta 1186822), reused 1420971 (delta 1182249)
Receiving objects: 100% (1427356/1427356), 310.10 MiB | 18 KiB/s, done.
Resolving deltas: 100% (1186822/1186822), done.
Checking out files: 100% (29214/29214), done.
cd linux-2.6-xen
git checkout -m xen/next
error: pathspec 'xen/next' did not match any file(s) known to git.
git pull
remote: Counting objects: 78, done.
remote: Compressing objects: 100% (59/59), done.
remote: Total 59 (delta 49), reused 0 (delta 0)
Unpacking objects: 100% (59/59), done.
>From git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jeremy/xen
c6f55dd..37a36aa xen/dom0/backend/netback -> origin/xen/dom0/backend/netback
ab77527..5c88709 xen/next -> origin/xen/next
Already up-to-date.
Is that right?!
Thanks!
Thiago
On 20 February 2010 23:02, Pasi Kärkkäinen <pasik@iki.fi> wrote:
On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 08:55:00PM +0100, Stefan Kuhne wrote:
> Am 20.02.2010 16:29, schrieb Pasi Kärkkäinen:
> Hello,
>
> > I just tried the latest xen/next 2.6.32 64bit dom0 kernel with Xen 4.0.0-rc4 hypervisor.
> > It seems to build, boot and work for me.
> >
> i'm new on git.
> How can i get xen/next?
>
git clone git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jeremy/xen.git linux-2.6-xen
cd linux-2.6-xen
git checkout -m xen/next
git pull
that should do it.
-- Pasi
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 4120 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 138 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2010-02-23 19:07 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2010-02-10 15:39 Issue with pv_ops Kernel 2.6.31.6 and Xen [yinghai@kernel.org: [PATCH 01/35] x86: fix sci on ioapic 1] Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2010-02-13 23:12 ` Marcial Rion
2010-02-16 18:10 ` SOLVED: " Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2010-02-16 21:51 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2010-02-17 8:33 ` Pasi Kärkkäinen
2010-02-17 11:56 ` M A Young
2010-02-17 18:53 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2010-02-17 22:35 ` M A Young
2010-02-17 22:56 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2010-02-17 23:24 ` M A Young
2010-02-17 18:52 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2010-02-17 19:07 ` Michael D Labriola
2010-02-17 19:20 ` Pasi Kärkkäinen
2010-02-17 19:36 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2010-02-17 19:41 ` Pasi Kärkkäinen
2010-02-17 19:47 ` Michael D Labriola
2010-02-17 19:55 ` Pasi Kärkkäinen
2010-02-17 19:34 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2010-02-20 15:29 ` xen/next Linux 2.6.32 pv_ops dom0 kernel Pasi Kärkkäinen
2010-02-20 19:55 ` Stefan Kuhne
2010-02-20 20:50 ` Boris Derzhavets
2010-02-20 21:01 ` Boris Derzhavets
2010-02-21 2:02 ` Pasi Kärkkäinen
2010-02-23 18:41 ` Martinx
2010-02-23 19:07 ` Boris Derzhavets
2010-02-22 20:27 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2010-02-22 23:23 ` Pasi Kärkkäinen
2010-02-22 23:34 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.