On 03/04/2014 08:33 AM, Don Slutz wrote:
> On 03/03/14 05:47, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
>> On 03/03/2014 07:33 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>> Il 03/03/2014 02:58, Alexey Kardashevskiy ha scritto:
On 03/02/2014 08:31 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 01/03/2014 13:30, Alexey Kardashevskiy ha sc
On 03/03/14 05:47, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
On 03/03/2014 07:33 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Il 03/03/2014 02:58, Alexey Kardashevskiy ha scritto:
On 03/02/2014 08:31 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Il 01/03/2014 13:30, Alexey Kardashevskiy ha scritto:
Corrupted DMA buffer is 0x e0 -- 0x7f15c313f
Il 03/03/2014 11:47, Alexey Kardashevskiy ha scritto:
> > Sorry, I am not following you here. Does KVM map things not page-aligned?
>
> Look in exec.c for xen_enabled(). Xen's implementation of
> address_space_map/unmap is completely different.
Honestly cannot see much difference in the current
On 03/03/2014 07:33 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 03/03/2014 02:58, Alexey Kardashevskiy ha scritto:
>> On 03/02/2014 08:31 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>> Il 01/03/2014 13:30, Alexey Kardashevskiy ha scritto:
>>
>> Corrupted DMA buffer is 0x e0 -- 0x7f15c313f000.
>> The e1000 packet i
Il 03/03/2014 02:58, Alexey Kardashevskiy ha scritto:
On 03/02/2014 08:31 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Il 01/03/2014 13:30, Alexey Kardashevskiy ha scritto:
Corrupted DMA buffer is 0x e0 -- 0x7f15c313f000.
The e1000 packet is at 0x12ffac2 -- 0x7f15c313eac2.
(0x7f15c313f000 - 0x7f15c313eac2)
On 03/02/2014 08:31 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 01/03/2014 13:30, Alexey Kardashevskiy ha scritto:
>>> >
>>> > Corrupted DMA buffer is 0x e0 -- 0x7f15c313f000.
>>> > The e1000 packet is at 0x12ffac2 -- 0x7f15c313eac2.
>>> >
>>> > (0x7f15c313f000 - 0x7f15c313eac2) = 0x53e which is less than 0
Il 01/03/2014 13:30, Alexey Kardashevskiy ha scritto:
>
> Corrupted DMA buffer is 0x e0 -- 0x7f15c313f000.
> The e1000 packet is at 0x12ffac2 -- 0x7f15c313eac2.
>
> (0x7f15c313f000 - 0x7f15c313eac2) = 0x53e which is less than 0x5aa and
> (0x5aa - 0x53e) = 0x6c bytes get corrupted.
>
> I see
On 02/24/2014 03:20 PM, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
> On 02/16/2014 03:29 PM, Hoyer, David wrote:
>
>> We are using Qemu-1.7.0 with Xen-4.3.0 and Debian jessie. We are
>> noticing that when we transfer large files from our network to the
>> guestOS via the e1000 virtual network device that we ex
Yes - we found this late last week and it did fix our issue. Thanks!
-Original Message-
From: Paolo Bonzini [mailto:paolo.bonz...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Paolo Bonzini
Sent: Monday, February 24, 2014 8:02 AM
To: Hoyer, David; Qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Cc: Moyer, Keith; Best, Tish
Subject: Re
Il 16/02/2014 05:29, Hoyer, David ha scritto:
> We are using Qemu-1.7.0 with Xen-4.3.0 and Debian jessie. We are
> noticing that when we transfer large files from our network to the
> guestOS via the e1000 virtual network device that we experience memory
> corruption on the guestOS. We have deb
On 02/16/2014 03:29 PM, Hoyer, David wrote:
> We are using Qemu-1.7.0 with Xen-4.3.0 and Debian jessie. We are
> noticing that when we transfer large files from our network to the
> guestOS via the e1000 virtual network device that we experience memory
> corruption on the guestOS. We have debu
We are using Qemu-1.7.0 with Xen-4.3.0 and Debian jessie. We are noticing
that when we transfer large files from our network to the guestOS via the e1000
virtual network device that we experience memory corruption on the guestOS.
We have debugged this problem and have determined where it app
12 matches
Mail list logo
