On 5/28/2019 8:02 AM, John L. Poole wrote:
On 5/28/2019 12:41 AM, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 03:35:21PM -0700, John L. Poole wrote:
On 5/27/2019 9:18 AM, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 05:27:34PM +0200, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
IMO it would be better if yo
On 5/28/2019 12:41 AM, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 03:35:21PM -0700, John L. Poole wrote:
On 5/27/2019 9:18 AM, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 05:27:34PM +0200, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
IMO it would be better if you can build directly from the upstream git
rep
On 5/28/2019 12:41 AM, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 03:35:21PM -0700, John L. Poole wrote:
On 5/27/2019 9:18 AM, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 05:27:34PM +0200, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
IMO it would be better if you can build directly from the upstream git
rep
On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 03:35:21PM -0700, John L. Poole wrote:
>
> On 5/27/2019 9:18 AM, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 05:27:34PM +0200, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> > > IMO it would be better if you can build directly from the upstream git
> > > repository [0], that way you could
On 5/27/2019 9:18 AM, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 05:27:34PM +0200, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
IMO it would be better if you can build directly from the upstream git
repository [0], that way you could use git-bisect(1) in order to figure
out which commit broke your system. For ex
On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 05:27:34PM +0200, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> IMO it would be better if you can build directly from the upstream git
> repository [0], that way you could use git-bisect(1) in order to figure
> out which commit broke your system. For example:
>
> # git clone git://xenbits.xen.o
On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 08:08:33AM -0700, John L. Poole wrote:
>
> On 4/29/2019 5:02 AM, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 09:23:11AM -0700, John L. Poole wrote:
> > > On 3/27/2019 7:21 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > > > > > On 27.03.19 at 14:25, wrote:
> > > > > On 3/27/2019 1:14
On 4/29/2019 5:02 AM, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 09:23:11AM -0700, John L. Poole wrote:
On 3/27/2019 7:21 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 27.03.19 at 14:25, wrote:
On 3/27/2019 1:14 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 26.03.19 at 18:21, wrote:
zeta /usr/local/src/xen # cat xen/.config
On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 09:23:11AM -0700, John L. Poole wrote:
>
> On 3/27/2019 7:21 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > > > On 27.03.19 at 14:25, wrote:
> > > On 3/27/2019 1:14 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > > > > > On 26.03.19 at 18:21, wrote:
> > > > > zeta /usr/local/src/xen # cat xen/.config |grep C
>>> On 16.04.19 at 18:23, wrote:
> On 3/27/2019 7:21 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 27.03.19 at 14:25, wrote:
>>> On 3/27/2019 1:14 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> On 26.03.19 at 18:21, wrote:
> zeta /usr/local/src/xen # cat xen/.config |grep CONFIG_HVM
> # CONFIG_HVM is not set
> z
On 3/27/2019 7:21 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 27.03.19 at 14:25, wrote:
On 3/27/2019 1:14 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 26.03.19 at 18:21, wrote:
zeta /usr/local/src/xen # cat xen/.config |grep CONFIG_HVM
# CONFIG_HVM is not set
zeta /usr/local/src/xen #
# tried 2 boot attempts
log at: https://p
>>> On 27.03.19 at 14:25, wrote:
> On 3/27/2019 1:14 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 26.03.19 at 18:21, wrote:
>>> zeta /usr/local/src/xen # cat xen/.config |grep CONFIG_HVM
>>> # CONFIG_HVM is not set
>>> zeta /usr/local/src/xen #
>>>
>>> # tried 2 boot attempts
>>> log at: https://pastebin.com/
On 3/27/2019 1:14 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 26.03.19 at 18:21, wrote:
zeta /usr/local/src/xen # cat xen/.config |grep CONFIG_HVM
# CONFIG_HVM is not set
zeta /usr/local/src/xen #
# tried 2 boot attempts
log at: https://pastebin.com/nL4BWJ6Y
Hang points at lines:
Thanks for trying anyway; on
>>> On 26.03.19 at 18:21, wrote:
> zeta /usr/local/src/xen # cat xen/.config |grep CONFIG_HVM
> # CONFIG_HVM is not set
> zeta /usr/local/src/xen #
>
> # tried 2 boot attempts
> log at: https://pastebin.com/nL4BWJ6Y
>
> Hang points at lines:
Thanks for trying anyway; one further possibility el
On 3/26/2019 1:04 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 25.03.19 at 18:00, wrote:
I removed the "maxcpus=1" and attempted seven (7) boots.
There were minor variations, they do not seem to get
past the first additional processor. Below is a summary.
And with "maxcpus=1" in place, is it as stable hanging
>>> On 25.03.19 at 18:00, wrote:
> I removed the "maxcpus=1" and attempted seven (7) boots.
> There were minor variations, they do not seem to get
> past the first additional processor. Below is a summary.
And with "maxcpus=1" in place, is it as stable hanging when trying
to bring up the 3rd AP?
On 3/25/2019 8:53 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 22.03.19 at 10:53, wrote:
2) Xen Source - here is the log of an attempt adding "cpuinfor maxcpus=1"
as an option in myman_xen.cfg:
https://pastebin.com/ifHZqCuX (6months)
Well, the "maxcpus=1" doesn't really hide the issue (anymore) because
we now b
>>> On 22.03.19 at 10:53, wrote:
> 2) Xen Source - here is the log of an attempt adding "cpuinfor maxcpus=1"
> as an option in myman_xen.cfg:
> https://pastebin.com/ifHZqCuX (6months)
Well, the "maxcpus=1" doesn't really hide the issue (anymore) because
we now bring up all secondary processors de
On 3/23/2019 11:50 PM, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 05:46:26PM -0700, John L. Poole wrote:
On 3/22/2019 7:40 AM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
On 22/03/2019 09:53, John L. Poole wrote:
3)Xen Source - here is the log of an attempt adding
"cpuinfor maxcpus=1 watchdog"
as an option in m
On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 05:46:26PM -0700, John L. Poole wrote:
>
> On 3/22/2019 7:40 AM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> > On 22/03/2019 09:53, John L. Poole wrote:
> > > 3)Xen Source - here is the log of an attempt adding
> > > "cpuinfor maxcpus=1 watchdog"
> > > as an option in myman_xen.cfg:
> > > https
On 3/22/2019 7:40 AM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
On 22/03/2019 09:53, John L. Poole wrote:
3)Xen Source - here is the log of an attempt adding
"cpuinfor maxcpus=1 watchdog"
as an option in myman_xen.cfg:
https://pastebin.com/b682FWmC (6 months)
The last 12 lines:
(XEN) [2019-03-22 09:37:49] Booting
On 22/03/2019 09:53, John L. Poole wrote:
> 3)Xen Source - here is the log of an attempt adding
> "cpuinfor maxcpus=1 watchdog"
> as an option in myman_xen.cfg:
> https://pastebin.com/b682FWmC (6 months)
>
> The last 12 lines:
> (XEN) [2019-03-22 09:37:49] Booting processor 2/4 eip 3e000
> (XEN) [2
On 21/03/2019 17:06, John L. Poole wrote:
> Is there something more I can include in the options or provide to
> help identify
> what is causing this problem. The only negative thing I can discern
> is the post of:
>
> (XEN) [0028257a81f8] Unrecognised CPU model 0x4d - assuming not
> reptpoli
On 3/22/2019 12:59 AM, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 10:06:38AM -0700, John L. Poole wrote:
Boot Hangs at: HVM: HAP page sizes: 4kB, 2MB or Adding cpu [INSERT 1-7] to
runqueue 0
Log (preserved for 6 months at https://pastebin.com/BDPP7Pzk)
fs0:\efi\gentoo> man_xen.efiip start
On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 10:06:38AM -0700, John L. Poole wrote:
> Boot Hangs at: HVM: HAP page sizes: 4kB, 2MB or Adding cpu [INSERT 1-7] to
> runqueue 0
>
> Log (preserved for 6 months at https://pastebin.com/BDPP7Pzk)
>
> fs0:\efi\gentoo> man_xen.efiip startup.nsh, any other key to continue.
> X
Boot Hangs at: HVM: HAP page sizes: 4kB, 2MB or Adding cpu [INSERT 1-7]
to runqueue 0
Log (preserved for 6 months at https://pastebin.com/BDPP7Pzk)
fs0:\efi\gentoo> man_xen.efiip startup.nsh, any other key to continue.
Xen 4.12.0-rc (c/s Mon Feb 25 13:06:22 2019 + git:f393b82fe5-dirty)
EFI
26 matches
Mail list logo
