Bug 436354 - [RHEL5.2]: Booting a Xen kernel inside a FV guest causes a dom0 crash
[RHEL5.2]: Booting a Xen kernel inside a FV guest causes a dom0 crash
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE of bug 436351
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5
Classification: Red Hat
Component: kernel-xen (Show other bugs)
All Linux
low Severity low
: rc
: ---
Assigned To: Xen Maintainance List
Martin Jenner
Depends On:
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2008-03-06 13:18 EST by Chris Lalancette
Modified: 2008-03-06 13:20 EST (History)
0 users

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2008-03-06 13:20:03 EST
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---

Attachments (Terms of Use)

  None (edit)
Description Chris Lalancette 2008-03-06 13:18:45 EST
Description of problem:
As initially reported by Dan, and now reproduced by me, if you take a Fully
Virtualized guest, install a Xen hypervisor in it, and then try to boot that
hypervisor, it will cause a panic on the dom0.  The actual stack trace is:

(XEN) ----[ Xen-3.1.2-84.el5  x86_64  debug=n  Not tainted ]----
(XEN) CPU:    2
(XEN) RIP:    e008:[<ffff828c801521bc>] missed_ticks+0x1c/0x40
(XEN) RFLAGS: 0000000000010256   CONTEXT: hypervisor
(XEN) rax: 000000000000019a   rbx: ffff8300c6ee9798   rcx: 0000000000000001
(XEN) rdx: 0000000000000000   rsi: 0000000060f583f0   rdi: ffff828c801cb558
(XEN) rbp: ffff8300c6ee9798   rsp: ffff8300c7df7e98   r8:  000008300abf4050
(XEN) r9:  ffff828c801cb540   r10: 0000000000000006   r11: ffff8300c6e16680
(XEN) r12: ffff828c801cb180   r13: 00000830300abf53   r14: ffff830000201a80
(XEN) r15: ffff830000021a00   cr0: 000000008005003b   cr4: 00000000000006f0
(XEN) cr3: 00000002258c4000   cr2: 0000000000000000
(XEN) ds: 0000   es: 0000   fs: 0000   gs: 0000   ss: 0000   cs: e008
(XEN) Xen stack trace from rsp=ffff8300c7df7e98:
(XEN)    ffff8300c6ee97e0 ffff828c8015220e ffff8300c6ee97e0 ffff8300c6fcd880
(XEN)    ffff828c801cb180 ffff828c80116ea1 0000000000000000 0000000000000002
(XEN)    ffff8300c7df7f28 ffff828c8022e880 ffff828c8022c880 ffff828c80115dd0
(XEN)    000000058e066754 ffff8300c6ee8080 000000058e066754 000000003b902534
(XEN)    00000000000000ff ffff828c8015cba8 ffff830000021a00 ffff830000201a80
(XEN)    00000000000000ff 000000003b902534 000000058e066754 00000000000f424a
(XEN)    0000000000000000 ffff828bfffff010 0000000000000000 6666666666666667
(XEN)    0000000000000000 0000000005f5e4e8 00000000000000d9 000000000000270f
(XEN)    0000000000000000 000000000000000b ffff8300001b8c21 000000000000e008
(XEN)    0000000000000006 ffff8300001e3ea0 0000000000000000 0000000000000180
(XEN)    0000000000000020 000000000e051e30 000000000e00d270 0000000000000002
(XEN)    ffff8300c6ee8080
(XEN) Xen call trace:
(XEN)    [<ffff828c801521bc>] missed_ticks+0x1c/0x40
Comment 1 Chris Lalancette 2008-03-06 13:20:03 EST
Duh.  Dan opened a similar bug...closing this as a dup.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 436351 ***

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.