Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756886Ab1FJMkw (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Jun 2011 08:40:52 -0400 Received: from smtp.eu.citrix.com ([62.200.22.115]:23152 "EHLO SMTP.EU.CITRIX.COM" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756011Ab1FJMkv (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Jun 2011 08:40:51 -0400 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.65,347,1304294400"; d="scan'208";a="6212298" Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2011 13:40:34 +0100 From: Tim Deegan To: Pasi K?rkk?inen CC: , Keir Fraser , Stabellini , "containers@lists.linux-foundation.org" , Li Zefan , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Michal Hocko , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , Keir Fraser , Igor Mammedov , Paul Menage , Hiroyuki Kamezawa , "akpm@linux-foundation.org" , Hiroyuki , "balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com" Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Possible shadow bug Message-ID: <20110610124034.GI5098@whitby.uk.xensource.com> References: <4DEE26E7.2060201@redhat.com> <20110608123527.479e6991.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <4DF0801F.9050908@redhat.com> <20110609150133.GF5098@whitby.uk.xensource.com> <4DF0F90D.4010900@redhat.com> <20110610100139.GG5098@whitby.uk.xensource.com> <20110610101011.GH5098@whitby.uk.xensource.com> <20110610114821.GB32595@reaktio.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110610114821.GB32595@reaktio.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1345 Lines: 33 At 14:48 +0300 on 10 Jun (1307717301), Pasi K?rkk?inen wrote: > On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 11:10:11AM +0100, Tim Deegan wrote: > > At 11:01 +0100 on 10 Jun (1307703699), Tim Deegan wrote: > > > ISTR that even though the RHEL xen reports a 3.0.x version it has quite > > > a lot of backports in it. Does it have this patch? > > > http://hg.uk.xensource.com/xen-3.1-testing.hg/rev/e8fca4c42d05 > > > > Oops, that URL doesn't work; I meant this: > > http://xenbits.xen.org/xen-3.1-testing.hg/rev/e8fca4c42d05 > > > > RHEL5 Xen (hypervisor) reports version as 3.1.2-xyz.. Based on a quick scrobble through the CentOS 5.6 SRPMs it looks like a 3.1.0 hypervisor with a bunch of extra patches, but not this one. This is very likely the cause of the crash in mem_cgroup_create(), and probably the corruptions too. That would explain why they didn't happen on a 4.0.x SLES11 Xen, but not really why the original patch in this thread made it go away. Cheers, Tim. -- Tim Deegan Principal Software Engineer, Xen Platform Team Citrix Systems UK Ltd. (Company #02937203, SL9 0BG) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/