bug-hurd
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Xen GNU Mach: bogus transaction id


From: Thomas Schwinge
Subject: Re: Xen GNU Mach: bogus transaction id
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2008 10:29:18 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.11

Hello!

On Tue, Dec 02, 2008 at 10:19:46AM +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Thomas Schwinge, le Tue 02 Dec 2008 09:16:53 +0100, a écrit :
> >     tschwinge@zenhost:~ $ sudo xm create -c foobar
> >     Using config file "/etc/xen/foobar".
> >     Started domain foobar
> >     GNU Mach 1.3.99
> >     Running on xen-3.0-x86_32.
> >     One module @8e000: 1108KB
> >     AT386 boot: physical memory from 0x0 to 0x5500000
> >     panic: bogus transaction id
> >     Kernel Breakpoint trap, eip 0x20457
> >     Stopped at  0x20456:    int     $3
> > 
> > It's still sitting in the kernel debugger (if you want to have a look),
> > and thus <http://www.bddebian.com:8888/> is down at the moment.
> 
> Could you get a trace?  I don't think there is much more to get anyway.

    db> trace
    0x20456(69b09,8d720,20390,0,0)
    0x2042d(6acc9,8d768,0,1ba400,1ba800)
    0x4143b(1,55047d4,5,6aa15,6b8eb)
    0x3edc5(72417,0,8d874,57a6,0)
    0x41e49(6bcd000,0,8d8a4,271c5,7c990)
    0x5715(7c990,68094,454,0,1b9000)
    Kernel page fault at address 0x10, eip = 0x43978
    Kernel Page fault trap, eip 0x43978
    Caught Page fault (14), code = 0, pc = 43978

    tschwinge@zenhost:~ $ addr2line -i -f -e /boot/gnumach-xen 0x20456 0x2042d 
0x4143b 0x3edc5 0x41e49 0x5715
    Debugger
    ../gnumach-1-branch-Xen-branch/kern/debug.c:105
    panic
    ../gnumach-1-branch-Xen-branch/kern/debug.c:148
    hyp_store_transaction_start
    ../gnumach-1-branch-Xen-branch/xen/store.c:156
    hyp_block_init
    ../gnumach-1-branch-Xen-branch/xen/block.c:187
    hyp_init
    ../gnumach-1-branch-Xen-branch/xen/xen.c:51
    machine_init
    ../gnumach-1-branch-Xen-branch/i386/i386at/model_dep.c:162


> Is it running the latest gnumach-1-xen source (apart from the PAE
> changes)?

Yes, something based on 2008-11-24 sources (would have to check my
notebook at home to be more precise).


Regards,
 Thomas

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]