Re: [PATCH] Fix lguest page-pinning logic ("lguest: bad stack page 0xc057a000")

2007-08-30 Thread Rusty Russell
On Thu, 2007-08-30 at 18:38 +0200, Frederik Deweerdt wrote: > On Tue, Aug 28, 2007 at 02:09:59AM +1000, Rusty Russell wrote: > > If the stack pointer is 0xc057a000, then the first stack page is at > > 0xc0579000 (the stack pointer is decremented before use). Not > > calculating this correctly cau

Re: [PATCH] Fix lguest page-pinning logic ("lguest: bad stack page 0xc057a000")

2007-08-30 Thread Frederik Deweerdt
On Tue, Aug 28, 2007 at 02:09:59AM +1000, Rusty Russell wrote: > If the stack pointer is 0xc057a000, then the first stack page is at > 0xc0579000 (the stack pointer is decremented before use). Not > calculating this correctly caused guests with CONFIG_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC=y > to be killed with a "bad s

[PATCH] Fix lguest page-pinning logic ("lguest: bad stack page 0xc057a000")

2007-08-29 Thread Rusty Russell
If the stack pointer is 0xc057a000, then the first stack page is at 0xc0579000 (the stack pointer is decremented before use). Not calculating this correctly caused guests with CONFIG_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC=y to be killed with a "bad stack page" message: the initial kernel stack was just proceeding the .s

[PATCH] Fix lguest page-pinning logic ("lguest: bad stack page 0xc057a000")

2007-08-28 Thread Rusty Russell
If the stack pointer is 0xc057a000, then the first stack page is at 0xc0579000 (the stack pointer is decremented before use). Not calculating this correctly caused guests with CONFIG_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC=y to be killed with a "bad stack page" message: the initial kernel stack was just preceeding the .s