linux-kernel - Re: dom0 show call trace and failed to boot on HSW-EX platform

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 2 Feb 2016 10:23:01 +0000
From:	David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com>
To:	Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>,
	"Li, Liang Z" <liang.z.li@...el.com>,
	"xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org" <xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
CC:	Daniel Kiper <daniel.kiper@...cle.com>,
	Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...e.com>, Tim Deegan <tim@....org>
Subject: Re: dom0 show call trace and failed to boot on HSW-EX platform

On 02/02/16 10:11, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 02/02/16 07:40, Li, Liang Z wrote:
>> Hi David,
>>
>> We found dom0 will crash when booing on HSW-EX server, the dom0 kernel version is v4.4. By debugging I found the your patch
>> ' x86/xen: discard RAM regions above the maximum reservation' , which the commit ID is : f5775e0b6116b7e2425ccf535243b21
>> caused the regression. The debug message is listed below:
>> ===============================================================
>>  (XEN) mm.c:884:d0v14 pg_owner 0 l1e_owner 0, but real_pg_owner -1
>>  (XEN) mm.c:955:d0v14 Error getting mfn 1080000 (pfn ffffffffffffffff) from L1 
>>  (XEN) mm.c:1269:d0v14 Failure in alloc_l1_table: entry 0
>>  (XEN) mm.c:2175:d0v14 Error while validating mfn 188d903 (pfn 17a7cc) for type 
>>  (XEN) mm.c:3101:d0v14 Error -16 while pinning mfn 188d903
>>  [   33.768792] ------------[ cut here ]------------
>> WARNING: CPU: 14 PID: 1 at arch/x86/xen/multicalls.c:129 xen_mc_
>>  [   33.783809] Modules linked in:
>>  [   33.787304] CPU: 14 PID: 1 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 4.4.0 #1
>>  [   33.793991] Hardware name: Intel Corporation BRICKLAND/BRICKLAND, BIOS 
>>  [   33.805624]  0000000000000081 ffff88017d2537c8 ffffffff812ff954 000000000000.[24;80H.[24;80H.[24;80H.[24;80H
>>  [   33.813961]  0000000000000000 0000000000000081 0000000000000000 ffff88017d25.[24;80H.[24;80H.[24;80H.[24;80H
>>  [   33.822300]  ffffffff810ca120 ffffffff81cb7f00 ffff8801879ca280 000000000000.[24;80H.[24;80H.[24;80H.[24;80H
>>  [   33.830639] Call Trace:
>>  [   33.833457]  [<ffffffff812ff954>] dump_stack+0x48/0x64
>>  [   33.839277]  [<ffffffff810ca120>] warn_slowpath_common+0x90/0xd0
>>  [   33.846058]  [<ffffffff810ca175>] warn_slowpath_null+0x15/0x20
>>  [   33.852659]  [<ffffffff81060133>] xen_mc_flush+0x1c3/0x1d0
>>  [   33.858858]  [<ffffffff8106449f>] xen_alloc_pte+0x20f/0x300
>>  [   33.865158]  [<ffffffff810beef5>] ? update_page_count+0x45/0x60
>>  [   33.871855]  [<ffffffff817a1194>] ? phys_pte_init+0x170/0x183
>>  [   33.878345]  [<ffffffff817a148d>] phys_pmd_init+0x2e6/0x389
>>  [   33.884649]  [<ffffffff817a17dd>] phys_pud_init+0x2ad/0x3dc
>>  [   33.890954]  [<ffffffff817a290d>] kernel_physical_mapping_init+0xec/0x211
>>  [   33.898613]  [<ffffffff8179df8d>] init_memory_mapping+0x17d/0x2f0
>>  [   33.905496]  [<ffffffff81104f11>] ? __raw_callee_save___pv_queued_spin_unloc.[24;80H.[24;80H.[24;80H.[24;80H.[24;80H.[24;80H.[24;80H.[24;80H.[24;80H.[24;80H.[24;80H
>>  [   33.914516]  [<ffffffff813643f7>] ? acpi_os_signal_semaphore+0x2e/0x32
>>  [   33.921889]  [<ffffffff810ba7b8>] arch_add_memory+0x48/0xf0
>>  [   33.928186]  [<ffffffff8179eb80>] add_memory_resource+0x80/0x110
>>  [   33.934967]  [<ffffffff8179ec8d>] add_memory+0x7d/0xc0
>>  [   33.940787]  [<ffffffff81399538>] acpi_memory_device_add+0x14f/0x237

We shouldn't be adding memory based on the ACPI tables.

David