Bug 240677

Summary: kernel-xen crashes with 4 GB Ram (while only 2 GB works fine)
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Kai Engert (:kaie) (inactive account) <kengert>
Component: kernel-xenAssignee: Xen Maintainance List <xen-maint>
Status: CLOSED INSUFFICIENT_DATA QA Contact: Virtualization Bugs <virt-bugs>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: rawhideCC: jeff, triage, xen-maint
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: i686   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard: bzcl34nup
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2008-05-07 01:46:31 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Attachments:
Description Flags
serial console crash log none

Description Kai Engert (:kaie) (inactive account) 2007-05-19 23:50:31 UTC
Description of problem:
Boot Fedora 7 (latest Rawhide) on an Intel Core Duo with 4 GB Ram installed.
Kernel crashes.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
kernel-xen-2.6.20-2925.8.fc7

Additional info:
The machine requires "irqpoll" to boot up.
The machine boots up fine with 4 GB when using standard kernel (non xen).
kernel-xen boots up fine with 2 GB ram installed in machine

but kernel-xen with 4 GB crashes on this machine.
I'm attaching a logfile from the serial console.

Please let me know if you need something from kdump (I'm not experienced here
but willing to work it out)

For hardware info of this machine see
bug 240221 attachment 154769 [details]
bug 240221 attachment 154770 [details]

Comment 1 Kai Engert (:kaie) (inactive account) 2007-05-19 23:50:31 UTC
Created attachment 155056 [details]
serial console crash log

Comment 2 Kai Engert (:kaie) (inactive account) 2007-05-21 10:20:40 UTC
workaround:

I added
  mem=4095m

as a boot parameter, this brings up kernel-xen fine.

Question: Is the kernel really using the full 4095 MB ?

[root@intel ~]# cat /proc/meminfo
MemTotal:      3239292 kB
MemFree:       2894764 kB
Buffers:         19504 kB
Cached:         107720 kB
SwapCached:          0 kB
Active:         112612 kB
Inactive:        83936 kB
HighTotal:     2502020 kB
HighFree:      2318032 kB
LowTotal:       737272 kB
LowFree:        576732 kB
SwapTotal:     2104496 kB
SwapFree:      2104496 kB
Dirty:              16 kB
Writeback:           0 kB
AnonPages:       69300 kB
Mapped:          28332 kB
Slab:            26680 kB
SReclaimable:     9660 kB
SUnreclaim:      17020 kB
PageTables:       4516 kB
NFS_Unstable:        0 kB
Bounce:              0 kB
CommitLimit:   3724140 kB
Committed_AS:   328736 kB
VmallocTotal:   114680 kB
VmallocUsed:      5256 kB
VmallocChunk:   109220 kB


Comment 3 Red Hat Bugzilla 2007-07-25 01:41:28 UTC
change QA contact

Comment 4 Bug Zapper 2008-04-04 00:48:13 UTC
Based on the date this bug was created, it appears to have been reported
against rawhide during the development of a Fedora release that is no
longer maintained. In order to refocus our efforts as a project we are
flagging all of the open bugs for releases which are no longer
maintained. If this bug remains in NEEDINFO thirty (30) days from now,
we will automatically close it.

If you can reproduce this bug in a maintained Fedora version (7, 8, or
rawhide), please change this bug to the respective version and change
the status to ASSIGNED. (If you're unable to change the bug's version
or status, add a comment to the bug and someone will change it for you.)

Thanks for your help, and we apologize again that we haven't handled
these issues to this point.

The process we're following is outlined here:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/F9CleanUp

We will be following the process here:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping to ensure this
doesn't happen again.

Comment 5 Bug Zapper 2008-05-07 01:46:29 UTC
This bug has been in NEEDINFO for more than 30 days since feedback was
first requested. As a result we are closing it.

If you can reproduce this bug in the future against a maintained Fedora
version please feel free to reopen it against that version.

The process we're following is outlined here:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/F9CleanUp