.. snip..
>>
>> > (XEN) Failed vm entry (exit reason 0x8021) caused by invalid guest
>> > state (4).
>>
>> 4 means invalid VMCS link pointer - interesting.
>>
>
> Hey Jan,
>
> I hadn't been able to look at this for a quite while. A couple of folks have
> showed interest in looking at this,
On Fri, Feb 05, 2016 at 03:33:44AM -0700, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 04.02.16 at 19:36, wrote:
> > (XEN) nvmx_handle_vmwrite 1: IO_BITMAP_A(2000)[0=]
> > (XEN) nvmx_handle_vmwrite 0: IO_BITMAP_A(2000)[0=]
> > (XEN) nvmx_handle_vmwrite 1:
> From: Tian, Kevin
> Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2016 1:52 PM
>
> > From: Jan Beulich [mailto:jbeul...@suse.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2016 5:35 PM
> > > (XEN) nvmx_handle_vmwrite: 0
> > > (XEN) nvmx_handle_vmwrite: 2008
> > > (XEN) nvmx_handle_vmwrite: 2008
> > > (XEN)
>>> On 04.02.16 at 19:36, wrote:
> (XEN) nvmx_handle_vmwrite 1: IO_BITMAP_A(2000)[0=]
> (XEN) nvmx_handle_vmwrite 0: IO_BITMAP_A(2000)[0=]
> (XEN) nvmx_handle_vmwrite 1: IO_BITMAP_B(2002)[0=]
> (XEN) nvmx_handle_vmwrite 2:
On Wed, Feb 03, 2016 at 10:07:27AM -0500, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 03, 2016 at 02:34:47AM -0700, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > >>> On 02.02.16 at 23:05, wrote:
> > > This is getting more and more bizzare.
> > >
> > > I realized that this machine has VMCS
>>> On 02.02.16 at 23:05, wrote:
> This is getting more and more bizzare.
>
> I realized that this machine has VMCS shadowing so Xen does not trap on
> any vmwrite or vmread. Unless I update the VMCS shadowing bitmap - which
> I did for vmwrite and vmread to get a better
On Wed, Feb 03, 2016 at 02:34:47AM -0700, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 02.02.16 at 23:05, wrote:
> > This is getting more and more bizzare.
> >
> > I realized that this machine has VMCS shadowing so Xen does not trap on
> > any vmwrite or vmread. Unless I update the VMCS
> From: Jan Beulich [mailto:jbeul...@suse.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2016 5:35 PM
> > (XEN) nvmx_handle_vmwrite: 0
> > (XEN) nvmx_handle_vmwrite: 2008
> > (XEN) nvmx_handle_vmwrite: 2008
> > (XEN) nvmx_handle_vmwrite: 0
> > (XEN) nvmx_handle_vmwrite: 2008
> > (XEN) nvmx_handle_vmwrite: 0
On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 02:41:52AM -0700, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 15.01.16 at 22:39, wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 02:22:03AM -0700, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> Since we can (I hope) pretty much exclude a paging type, the
> >> ASSERT() must have triggered because of
>>> On 15.01.16 at 22:39, wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 02:22:03AM -0700, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> Since we can (I hope) pretty much exclude a paging type, the
>> ASSERT() must have triggered because of vapic_pg being NULL.
>> That might be verifiable without extra
On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 02:22:03AM -0700, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 12.01.16 at 04:38, wrote:
> > (XEN) Assertion 'vapic_pg && !p2m_is_paging(p2mt)' failed at vvmx.c:698
> > (XEN) [ Xen-4.6.0 x86_64 debug=y Tainted:C ]
> > (XEN) CPU:39
> > (XEN) RIP:
>>> On 12.01.16 at 04:38, wrote:
> (XEN) Assertion 'vapic_pg && !p2m_is_paging(p2mt)' failed at vvmx.c:698
> (XEN) [ Xen-4.6.0 x86_64 debug=y Tainted:C ]
> (XEN) CPU:39
> (XEN) RIP:e008:[] virtual_vmentry+0x487/0xac9
> (XEN) RFLAGS: 00010246
Insure that memory and maxmem are set to the same value.
On 01/11/2016 10:38 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
Hey,
The machine is an X5-2 which is a Haswell based E5-2699 v3.
We are trying to launch to use the nested virtualization. The
guest is a simple VMware vSphere 6.0 with 32GB, 8
Hey,
The machine is an X5-2 which is a Haswell based E5-2699 v3.
We are trying to launch to use the nested virtualization. The
guest is a simple VMware vSphere 6.0 with 32GB, 8 CPUs.
The guest than that is launched within VMware is a 2 VCPU 2GB Linux
(OEL6 to be exact). During its bootup Xen
14 matches
Mail list logo