Bug 428826

Summary: Kernel panic while installing 4.6 as Xen guest on top of 5.1
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4 Reporter: Jan Sarenik <jsarenik>
Component: kernel-xenAssignee: Xen Maintainance List <xen-maint>
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE QA Contact: Martin Jenner <mjenner>
Severity: low Docs Contact:
Priority: low    
Version: 4.6   
Target Milestone: rc   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: x86_64   
OS: Linux   
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2008-01-23 14:26:03 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---

Description Jan Sarenik 2008-01-15 14:44:25 UTC
Description of problem:
Xen-enabled Linux hangs with traceback.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
RHEL4.6 on top of RHEL5.1 (running 2.6.18-53.el5xen)

How reproducible:
I tried two times, both were eligible.

Steps to Reproduce:
1. start installing RHEL4.6 via virt-manager on clear RHEL5.1 Xen domain0
2. mirror used was http://mirror.brq.redhat.com/rhel/RHEL-4/U6/AS/i386/tree/
3. at some later point of installation it hangs and on virt. serial console
   I see this traceback:
kernel BUG at arch/i386/mm/hypervisor.c:196!
invalid operand: 0000 [#1]
Modules linked in: dm_snapshot dm_mirror dm_zero dm_mod ext3 jbd msdos raid6
raid5 xor raid1 raid0 xenblk xennet sr_mod sd_mod scsi_mod cdrom loop nfs
nfs_acl lockd sunrpc vfat fat cramfs vga16fb vgastate
CPU:    0
EIP:    0061:[<c011548e>]    Not tainted VLI
EFLAGS: 00210082   (2.6.9-67.ELxenU) 
EIP is at xen_pgd_pin+0x46/0x54
eax: ffffffea   ebx: d5d5cf20   ecx: 00000001   edx: 00000000
esi: 00007ff0   edi: d5d5cf90   ebp: d5d5cfbc   esp: d5d5cf20
ds: 007b   es: 007b   ss: 0068
Process anaconda (pid: 429, threadinfo=d5d5c000 task=df29a6c0)
Stack: 00000002 00063719 c7e13018 07e13000 000fc260 d91310c0 c0112ca2 07e13000 
       c7e13000 00000061 80000000 d9131104 c0112d36 c7e13000 d91310c0 00000000 
       c0269f6e d91310c0 deddc2c0 00000830 d246d2e0 c1400320 00040cc2 09f601c2 
Call Trace:
 [<c0112ca2>] __pgd_pin+0x2d/0x41
 [<c0112d36>] mm_pin+0x21/0x2e
 [<c0269f6e>] schedule+0x3a2/0x544
 [<c0127423>] sys_rt_sigprocmask+0x97/0x14c
 [<c0105cd7>] sys_fork+0x16/0x1a
 [<c01073c6>] work_resched+0x5/0x25
Code: 00 75 0d a1 a0 e0 35 c0 8b 04 90 25 ff ff ff 7f 89 44 24 04 89 e3 b9 01 00
00 00 31 d2 be f0 7f 00 00 e8 b6 be fe ff 85 c0 79 08 <0f> 0b c4 00 7c 4e 27 c0
83 c4 10 5b 5e c3 56 53 83 ec 10 8b 54

Comment 1 Chris Lalancette 2008-01-16 14:14:37 UTC
Hm, that seems odd, I'm certain this is one of the combinations that's been well
tested.  I need some more details about the dom0; is it x86_64, or i386?  When
the RHEL-4 guest crashes, can you run "xm dmesg" and post the output here?

Chris Lalancette

Comment 2 Jan Sarenik 2008-01-23 12:23:31 UTC
(In reply to comment #1)

Hi Chris!

> Hm, that seems odd, I'm certain this is one of the combinations that's been well
> tested.  I need some more details about the dom0; is it x86_64, or i386?  When
> the RHEL-4 guest crashes, can you run "xm dmesg" and post the output here?

dom0 was x86_64 and the guest machine I was trying to install is i386,

Sorry I can not provide you with the output of "xm dmesg" at the moment
because the machine is alredy being used under slightly different

   Best regards
  Jan Sarenik

PS: I work as Lab Admin here in Brno office so I should be able to find some
    unused machine and test it again very soon. Will keep you updated.

Comment 3 Jan Sarenik 2008-01-23 14:14:45 UTC
Now, I am trying intallation of paravirtualized i386 RHEL4.6 on top of x86_64
RHEL 5.1 (with all up-to-date RHN fixes) and it does not work on two different
host machines (one of them being Dell 1950 server, the other Xeon based IBM
Blade). Not even such nice debugging options like on the first machine where
I was able to see kernel messages in virtual serial console.

I feel like giving in, but if you think there is any chance for me to be
helpful in this case, let me know please.

   Best regards
  Jan Sarenik
Lab Admin / System Admin, Red Hat Czech s.r.o., Purkynova 99, Brno

Comment 4 Jan Sarenik 2008-01-23 14:22:49 UTC
The collegue of mine told me that this particular configuration
(putting RHEL4-32 on top of RHEL5-64) is tech-preview at the moment
so now I know I am trying something which is well known for not working.

Comment 5 Chris Lalancette 2008-01-23 14:26:03 UTC
You should definitely give up.  i386 PV on x86_64 dom0 is a combination known
not to work in 5.1.  There are some patches going in for 5.2 that should help
this; I'm going to close this as a dup of the BZ we are using to track 32-on-64

Chris Lalancette

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 383211 ***