From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Atom2 Subject: Re: HVM domains crash after upgrade from XEN 4.5.1 to 4.5.2 Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2015 15:12:49 +0100 Message-ID: <56449E61.9080000@web2web.at> References: <5643E68C.8090406@web2web.at> <564499B002000078000B43EE@prv-mh.provo.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <564499B002000078000B43EE@prv-mh.provo.novell.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: Jan Beulich Cc: xen-devel@lists.xen.org List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Hi Jan, many thanks for your reply. Answers are further down inline. Am 12.11.15 um 13:52 schrieb Jan Beulich: >>>> On 12.11.15 at 02:08, wrote: >> After the upgrade HVM domUs appear to no longer work - regardless of the >> dom0 kernel (tested with both 3.18.9 and 4.1.7 as the dom0 kernel); PV >> domUs, however, work just fine as before on both dom0 kernels. >> >> xl dmesg shows the following information after the first crashed HVM >> domU which is started as part of the machine booting up: >> [...] >> (XEN) Failed vm entry (exit reason 0x80000021) caused by invalid guest >> state (0). >> (XEN) ************* VMCS Area ************** >> (XEN) *** Guest State *** >> (XEN) CR0: actual=0x0000000000000039, shadow=0x0000000000000011, >> gh_mask=ffffffffffffffff >> (XEN) CR4: actual=0x0000000000002050, shadow=0x0000000000000000, >> gh_mask=ffffffffffffffff >> (XEN) CR3: actual=0x0000000000800000, target_count=0 >> (XEN) target0=0000000000000000, target1=0000000000000000 >> (XEN) target2=0000000000000000, target3=0000000000000000 >> (XEN) RSP = 0x0000000000006fdc (0x0000000000006fdc) RIP = >> 0x0000000100000000 (0x0000000100000000) > Other than RIP looking odd for a guest still in non-paged protected > mode I can't seem to spot anything wrong with guest state. > Considering that there was just a single HVM-related commit > between the two releases (which looks completely unrelated) I > wonder whether you're observing a problem that's a side effect > of something else, e.g. a build system change (compiler update or > alike). If that can be ruled out, I guess the only chance would be > for you to bisect for the offending commit. A few weeks ago there was an update of the gcc compiler from version 4.8.5 to 4.9.3. The old version of XEN (i.e. 4.5.1) was compiled in August on gcc-4.8.5. The current version xen-4.5.2 was compiled yesterday and obviously used gcc-4.9.3. I might try to re-compile with 4.8.5 again in case that makes any sense (gcc-4.8.5 is still installed in another slot on my system), but will first reply to Andrew as well. > > Are you observing this on more than one kind of system? Unfortunately this system is currently my only XEN system and it was rock-solid over the last couple of years with virtually no down-time once it was up and running with various XEN and dom0 kernel versions. > > Jan Many thanks Atom