[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4A94283C.6000405@goop.org>
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 11:06:52 -0700
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
CC: Arnd Hannemann <hannemann@...s.rwth-aachen.de>,
Arnd Hannemann <Arnd.Hannemann@...s.rwth-aachen.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"hannes@...xchg.org" <hannes@...xchg.org>,
"torvalds@...ux-foundation.org" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
"xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com" <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [bisected] 2.6.31 regression: fails to boot as xen guest
On 08/25/09 09:52, Pekka Enberg wrote:
> Hi Arnd,
>
> On Tue, 2009-08-25 at 18:49 +0200, Arnd Hannemann wrote:
>
>>> Thanks for doing the bisect! Can we also see your .config also?
>>>
>> Config for -rc7 is attached. My bisect configs were based on that
>>
> Thanks! While we wait for the Xen people, you can try the following
> patch to see if we can narrow the bug down to trap_init().
>
I think there's a problem that the side-effect of this change is that
interrupt initialization comes later, and so the dynamically allocated
arrays are not set up when the first interrupt comes in.
However, this particular change shouldn't have any effect on interrupts
being enabled early, right?
I have a local workaround which simply reverts the arrays back to
statically allocated, but it isn't very satisfactory (large memory hit,
esp if you're not running Xen).
J
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists