From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E75B0C48BE8 for ; Wed, 16 Jun 2021 15:12:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.xenproject.org (lists.xenproject.org [192.237.175.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B4B4561166 for ; Wed, 16 Jun 2021 15:12:56 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org B4B4561166 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=reject dis=none) header.from=citrix.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Received: from list by lists.xenproject.org with outflank-mailman.143382.264277 (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1ltXDg-0000AJ-T6; Wed, 16 Jun 2021 15:12:44 +0000 X-Outflank-Mailman: Message body and most headers restored to incoming version Received: by outflank-mailman (output) from mailman id 143382.264277; Wed, 16 Jun 2021 15:12:44 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.xenproject.org) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1ltXDg-0000AB-Q5; Wed, 16 Jun 2021 15:12:44 +0000 Received: by outflank-mailman (input) for mailman id 143382; Wed, 16 Jun 2021 15:12:43 +0000 Received: from us1-rack-iad1.inumbo.com ([172.99.69.81]) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1ltXDf-00009y-Dw for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Wed, 16 Jun 2021 15:12:43 +0000 Received: from esa4.hc3370-68.iphmx.com (unknown [216.71.155.144]) by us1-rack-iad1.inumbo.com (Halon) with ESMTPS id fe398a16-51bf-4ce6-9f81-1df8f429cb86; Wed, 16 Jun 2021 15:12:42 +0000 (UTC) X-BeenThere: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org List-Id: Xen developer discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Precedence: list Sender: "Xen-devel" X-Inumbo-ID: fe398a16-51bf-4ce6-9f81-1df8f429cb86 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=citrix.com; s=securemail; t=1623856362; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to; bh=4OHMNBsyC4VgF/ZEWfsxw0GmwEl9ZlrkDb/L+SKMo1g=; b=EnJ4wuxMFuzVYumkYi/OaL8nVChfvekb+NtU/8ml+XWBw92smrASC5cS 2F6VHFA1fdtFSYp3Prq4HJxPNrHD1kZTJROdvpR2gJrEJuz4Gu08ux79k +1b3BKB9lZH7EwZoXLvK4oToabwKifaoDMXOtnDC6hEr6JDBgPdkoSHjh Y=; Authentication-Results: esa4.hc3370-68.iphmx.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.i=none IronPort-SDR: 0MKoFemF0jnFkhsTgYcSxVl1bRzQJnsJFOXZ3ol5k5f4f0/b5ysRQ1ueN8/OoWuciJHgIcRg2R SrpOja0H81mSuohxwGnM6aOyKJTjOYepR3R2pfuGs4kTkqthGhWVq6yiF9Ovrvr+I9ddMqrNme Bi5rWvXIkkLS81QBKIgaSzCrMPhBkUtca416D/OYXaNZcFETolgF4PgAv7dvV5VjseGpOsCpUj lwl/tqlHQQEO2uAVxbdaHxxPRWcrUSCOKGo+WsDljl5z8adWTorPThNc0TRIFpL1CQAmSJ6GG3 Qak= X-SBRS: 5.1 X-MesageID: 47855158 X-Ironport-Server: esa4.hc3370-68.iphmx.com X-Remote-IP: 162.221.158.21 X-Policy: $RELAYED IronPort-HdrOrdr: A9a23:9Ylkga0CLrFmu14Wv338sAqjBL4kLtp133Aq2lEZdPUCSL39qy ncppUmPH7P5wr5N0tNpTntAsO9qDbnhP1ICOoqVotKPjOHhILAFugL0WKh+UyDJ8SUzJ856U 4PScVD4JSbNzZHsfo= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.83,278,1616472000"; d="scan'208";a="47855158" Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2021 16:12:38 +0100 From: Anthony PERARD To: Jan Beulich CC: Ian Jackson , , osstest service owner Subject: Re: [xen-unstable test] 162845: regressions - FAIL Message-ID: References: <8e39ca8f-3202-7d3a-d65d-7087634bd49e@suse.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 04:49:33PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: > I don't think it should. But I now notice I should have looked at the > logs of these tests: > > xc: info: Saving domain 2, type x86 HVM > xc: error: Unable to obtain the guest p2m size (1 = Operation not permitted): Internal error > xc: error: Save failed (1 = Operation not permitted): Internal error > > which looks suspiciously similar to the issue Jürgen's d21121685fac > ("tools/libs/guest: fix save and restore of pv domains after 32-bit > de-support") took care of, just that here we're dealing with a HVM > guest. I'll have to go inspect what exactly the library is doing there, > and hence where in Xen the -EPERM may be coming from all of the > sudden (and only for OVMF). > > Of course the behavior you describe above may play into this, since > aiui this might lead to an excessively large p2m (depending what > exactly you mean with "as high as possible"). The maximum physical address size as reported by cpuid 0x80000008 (or 1<<48 if above that) minus 1 page, or 1<<36 - 1 page. -- Anthony PERARD