Il Mer 11 Apr 2018, 22:48 Olaf Hering <o...@aepfle.de> ha scritto: > On Wed, Apr 11, Dario Faggioli wrote: > > > It will crash, again, possibly with the same stack trace, but I think > > it's worth a try. > > BUG_ON(__vcpu_on_runq(CSCHED_VCPU(vc))); > > (XEN) Xen BUG at sched_credit.c:876 > (XEN) ----[ Xen-4.11.20180410T125709.50f8ba84a5-7.bug1087289_411 x86_64 > debug=y Not tainted ]---- > (XEN) CPU: 108 > (XEN) RIP: e008:[<ffff82d080229ab4>] > sched_credit.c#csched_vcpu_migrate+0x27/0x54 > (XEN) RFLAGS: 0000000000010006 CONTEXT: hypervisor > ... > (XEN) Xen call trace: > (XEN) [<ffff82d080229ab4>] sched_credit.c#csched_vcpu_migrate+0x27/0x54 > (XEN) [<ffff82d080236348>] schedule.c#vcpu_move_locked+0xbb/0xc2 > (XEN) [<ffff82d08023764c>] schedule.c#vcpu_migrate+0x226/0x25b > (XEN) [<ffff82d080239367>] context_saved+0x95/0x9c > (XEN) [<ffff82d08027797d>] context_switch+0xe66/0xeb0 > (XEN) [<ffff82d080236943>] schedule.c#schedule+0x5f4/0x627 > (XEN) [<ffff82d080239f15>] softirq.c#__do_softirq+0x85/0x90 > (XEN) [<ffff82d080239f6a>] do_softirq+0x13/0x15 > (XEN) [<ffff82d08031f5db>] vmx_asm_do_vmentry+0x2b/0x30 >
So, really *exactly* the same. Ok, thanks. I think that from "CONTEXT: hypervisor", we can tell that the current vcpu is the idle one, and I'm starting to wonder whether the lazy context switch logic may play a role in all this. But, for now, it's just a gut feeling. I'll investigate tomorrow. Another thing we could do, would be to try George's migratiin refactoring series. I haven't reviewed it in details yet, but it seemed reasonable at a first glance. Not that that could be the solution (backportabiliry, ecc), but, if it works, it might give us ideas on where to look, and on how to produce a stepgap patch, "just" solving the issue. Thanks and regards, Dario
_______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
