> -----Original Message-----
> From: Julien Grall [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: 06 June 2017 18:41
> To: Paul Durrant <[email protected]>; 'Jan Beulich'
> <[email protected]>
> Cc: xen-devel ([email protected]) <xen-
> [email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] debian stretch dom0 + xen 4.9 fails to boot
>
> Hi Paul,
>
> On 06/06/17 16:51, Paul Durrant wrote:
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Jan Beulich [mailto:[email protected]]
> >> Sent: 06 June 2017 16:11
> >> To: Paul Durrant <[email protected]>
> >> Cc: xen-devel ([email protected]) <xen-
> >> [email protected]>
> >> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] debian stretch dom0 + xen 4.9 fails to boot
> >>
> >>>>> On 06.06.17 at 16:32, <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>> I've been having fun setting up a new test rig...
> >>>
> >>> I have a skull canyon NUC and I put debian stretch (rc4) on it (so that's
> >>> a
> >>> 4.9 kernel) and then tried building and installing the latest Xen staging-
> 4.9
> >>> code. The system failed to boot... basically it got stuck before even
> >>> managing to get sufficiently into Xen to spit out anything on the console.
> >>> Xen 4.8 OTOH booted just fine so I started bisecting and after 14
> iterations
> >>> I got down to the following commit is being the problem:
> >>>
> >>> commit c0655e492e6b33e26ec9cd33f59725d0db89cdd0
> >>> Author: Juergen Gross <[email protected]>
> >>> Date: Fri Mar 24 14:18:54 2017 +0100
> >>>
> >>> x86: split boot trampoline into permanent and temporary part
> >>>
> >>> The hypervisor needs a trampoline in low memory for early boot and
> >>> later for bringing up cpus and during wakeup from suspend. Today this
> >>> trampoline is kept completely even if most of it isn't needed later.
> >>>
> >>> Split the trampoline into a permanent part and a temporary part
> needed
> >>> at early boot only. Introduce a new entry at the boundary.
> >>>
> >>> Reduce the stack for wakeup code in order for the permanent
> >>> trampoline to fit in a single page. 4k of stack seems excessive, about
> >>> 3k should be more than enough.
> >>>
> >>> Add an ASSERT() to the linker script to ensure the wakeup stack is
> >>> always at least 3k.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Juergen Gross <[email protected]>
> >>> Reviewed-by: Jan Beulich <[email protected]>
> >>>
> >>> To verify this I checked out master, reverted that commit, and tried
> again.
> >>> The NUC still booted fine.
> >>
> >> Well, interesting, but I don't think it is very realistic to expect any
> >> fix with just the information you supply. There must be something
> >> rather special about that system, and likely it would help if we
> >> knew what that is. E.g. an unusual E820 map. Worse would be if
> >> they used memory outside of properly marked E820 regions in a
> >> way colliding with what we do.
> >>
> >> Otherwise I'm afraid we need to hope for you to debug the issue.
> >>
> >
> > Yes, I was posting this more a heads-up for the moment, so that 4.9 does
> not go out with this regression.
>
> I would have appreciated to be CCed in this e-mail as this concern 4.9
> release... Please take the habit to CC the release manager for anything
> targeting a release.
>
Yes, sorry I should have cc-ed... I was in a bit of a rush and forgot.
Cheers,
Paul
> Cheers,
>
> --
> Julien Grall
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
