Hi All,
Does xVM support Nevada HVM? I finished a Nevada HVM installation and
tried to boot up it. But on the Guest console there are a lot of
warnings. Is there any hint when I install or boot a Nevada HVM?
WARNINGS: /pci@0,0/pci-ide@1,1/ide@1 (ata1):
timeout: abort request, target=0 lun=0
WARNINGS: /pci@0,0/pci-ide@1,1/ide@1 (ata1):
timeout: abort request, target=0 lun=0
WARNINGS: /pci@0,0/pci-ide@1,1/ide@1 (ata1):
timeout: reset target, target=0 lun=0
WARNINGS: /pci@0,0/pci-ide@1,1/ide@1 (ata1):
timeout: reset bus, target=0 lun=0
WARNINGS: /pci@0,0/pci-ide@1,1/ide@1/cmdk@0,0 (Disk0):
Error for command ''read sector'' Error Level:
Informational
Sense Key: aborted command
Vendor ''Gen-ATA'' error code 0x3
Best Regards
Jiajun
> Does xVM support Nevada HVM? I finished a Nevada HVM installation and > tried to boot up it. But on the Guest console there are a lot of > warnings. Is there any hint when I install or boot a Nevada HVM? > > WARNINGS: /pci@0,0/pci-ide@1,1/ide@1 (ata1): > timeout: abort request, target=0 lun=0 > /pci@0,0/pci-ide@1,1/ide@1 (ata1): > timeout: abort request, target=0 lun=0 > /pci@0,0/pci-ide@1,1/ide@1 (ata1): > timeout: reset target, target=0 lun=0 > /pci@0,0/pci-ide@1,1/ide@1 (ata1): > timeout: reset bus, target=0 lun=0 > /pci@0,0/pci-ide@1,1/ide@1/cmdk@0,0 (Disk0): > Error for command ''read sector'' Error > Level: Informational > Sense Key: aborted command Vendor ''Gen-ATA'' error code 0x3I think there are still some issues with the HVM virtual ATA hardware and OpenSolaris'' ata driver. See bug 6629177 "ata driver is broken under xVM HVM" http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6629177 Try the workaround from that bug, disable ATA DMA transfers. Edit the GRUB kernel command line, " -B ata-dma-enabled=0 " should work This message posted from opensolaris.org
Try the workaround for bug "6581292 atapi DMA emulation broken for disks" : -B atapi-cd-dma-enabled=0,atapi-other-dma-enabled=0 Regards Xu, Jiajun wrote:> Hi All, > Does xVM support Nevada HVM? I finished a Nevada HVM installation and > tried to boot up it. But on the Guest console there are a lot of > warnings. Is there any hint when I install or boot a Nevada HVM? > > WARNINGS: /pci@0,0/pci-ide@1,1/ide@1 (ata1): > timeout: abort request, target=0 lun=0 > WARNINGS: /pci@0,0/pci-ide@1,1/ide@1 (ata1): > timeout: abort request, target=0 lun=0 > WARNINGS: /pci@0,0/pci-ide@1,1/ide@1 (ata1): > timeout: reset target, target=0 lun=0 > WARNINGS: /pci@0,0/pci-ide@1,1/ide@1 (ata1): > timeout: reset bus, target=0 lun=0 > WARNINGS: /pci@0,0/pci-ide@1,1/ide@1/cmdk@0,0 (Disk0): > Error for command ''read sector'' Error Level: Informational > Sense Key: aborted command > Vendor ''Gen-ATA'' error code 0x3 > > Best Regards > Jiajun > _______________________________________________ > xen-discuss mailing list > xen-discuss@opensolaris.org > >
I have tried to add "-B ata-dma-enabled=0", then previous warnning has disappeared, but one new issue appears: the guest will reboot again and again. I got following message from screen: panic[cpu0]/thread=f502c360: Processor does not support PAE f50574dc unix:mmu_init+380 (0, f4c00010, f502ba) f5057528 unix:startup_memlist+da (f5057540, f4d38b9a, ) f5057530 unix:startup+26 (f4c00010, f50532c8, ) f5057540 genunix:main+1e () panic[cpu0]/thread=f502c360: BAD TRAP: type=e (#pf Page fault) rp=f505cddc addr=f000ff53 dump aborted: please record the above information! rebooting... What's wrong with this? Thanks! Frank -----Original Message----- From: xen-discuss-bounces@opensolaris.org [mailto:xen-discuss-bounces@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Jürgen Keil Sent: 2008年1月29日 2:16 To: xen-discuss@opensolaris.org Subject: Re: [xen-discuss] Help with booting up Nevada HVM> Does xVM support Nevada HVM? I finished a Nevada HVM installation and > tried to boot up it. But on the Guest console there are a lot of > warnings. Is there any hint when I install or boot a Nevada HVM? > > WARNINGS: /pci@0,0/pci-ide@1,1/ide@1 (ata1): > timeout: abort request, target=0 lun=0 > /pci@0,0/pci-ide@1,1/ide@1 (ata1): > timeout: abort request, target=0 lun=0 > /pci@0,0/pci-ide@1,1/ide@1 (ata1): > timeout: reset target, target=0 lun=0 > /pci@0,0/pci-ide@1,1/ide@1 (ata1): > timeout: reset bus, target=0 lun=0 > /pci@0,0/pci-ide@1,1/ide@1/cmdk@0,0 (Disk0): > Error for command 'read sector' Error > Level: Informational > Sense Key: aborted command Vendor 'Gen-ATA' error code 0x3I think there are still some issues with the HVM virtual ATA hardware and OpenSolaris' ata driver. See bug 6629177 "ata driver is broken under xVM HVM" http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6629177 Try the workaround from that bug, disable ATA DMA transfers. Edit the GRUB kernel command line, " -B ata-dma-enabled=0 " should work This message posted from opensolaris.org _______________________________________________ xen-discuss mailing list xen-discuss@opensolaris.org _______________________________________________ xen-discuss mailing list xen-discuss@opensolaris.org
> I have tried to add "-B ata-dma-enabled=0", then > previous warnning has disappeared, but one new issue > appears: the guest will reboot again and again. > I got following message from screen: > > panic[cpu0]/thread=f502c360: Processor does not support PAE > > f50574dc unix:mmu_init+380 (0, f4c00010, f502ba) > f5057528 unix:startup_memlist+da (f5057540, f4d38b9a, ) > f5057530 unix:startup+26 (f4c00010, f50532c8, ) > f5057540 genunix:main+1e ()Are you sure that the "-B ata-dma-enabled=0" kernel argument affects whether or not you get that "Processor does not support PAE" panic ? Are you trying to boot a PV or a HVM domain? The ata driver timeout warnings should be printed much later, when the root filesystem is going to be mounted. The above "Processor does not support PAE" panic should happen much earlier, before the root filesystem gets mounted. So I don''t expect that "-B ata-dma-enabled=0" affects the panic from mmu_init(). What kind of processor is installed in your system? Problem under Xen seems to be that the hypervisor was compiled to emulate a 3-level mmu (similar to an x86 cpu with PAE support), the Solaris kernel has already decided to use the 3-level code, but later on in mmu_init() checks whether the processor''s CPUID instruction reports the presence of the PAE mmu feature. With old processors (Pentium-M, Pentium-II, old AMD Athlons) the PAE mmu feature isn''t present. http://src.opensolaris.org/source/xref/onnv/onnv-gate/usr/src/uts/i86pc/vm/hat_i86.c#526 526 if (mmu.pae_hat && (x86_feature & X86_PAE) == 0) 527 panic("Processor does not support PAE"); IMO, under the hypervisor we shouldn''t panic here. For my Tecra S1 laptop with Pentium-M cpu (which has no PAE support), I''ve changed that panic into a cmn_err warning and just continue. Works just fine, both for an OpenSolaris dom0 and OpenSolaris PV domUs. The other option is to compile and install a new xen hypervisor which has the 3-level mmu support removed. For a quick test you can also try to boot Solaris under debugger control and patch out that "(x86_feature & X86_PAE) == 0" test. Boot the kernel with options "-kd", disassemble the code at location "mmu_init+13f": [0]> mmu_init+13f::dis mmu_init+0xfd: cmpl $0x0,0xf502c06c <mmu+0x34> mmu_init+0x104: jne +0x25 <mmu_init+0x12b> mmu_init+0x106: cmpl $0x20,%ebx mmu_init+0x109: jbe +0xa <mmu_init+0x115> mmu_init+0x10b: movl $0xfffff,0xf502c048 <mmu+0x10> mmu_init+0x115: movl $0x4,0xf502c088 <mmu+0x50> mmu_init+0x11f: movl $0x2,0xf502c08c <mmu+0x54> mmu_init+0x129: jmp +0x24 <mmu_init+0x14f> mmu_init+0x12b: movl $0x8,0xf502c088 <mmu+0x50> mmu_init+0x135: movl $0x3,0xf502c08c <mmu+0x54> mmu_init+0x13f: movl 0xf5000774,%eax <x86_feature> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< mmu_init+0x144: andl $0x200,%eax <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< mmu_init+0x149: je +0x227 <mmu_init+0x376> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< mmu_init+0x14f: movl 0xf5000774,%eax <x86_feature> mmu_init+0x154: andl $0x400,%eax mmu_init+0x159: je +0x229 <mmu_init+0x388> mmu_init+0x15f: cmpl $0x0,0xf5000a48 <kbm_largepage_support> mmu_init+0x166: jne +0xe <mmu_init+0x176> mmu_init+0x168: xorl %eax,%eax mmu_init+0x16a: movl %eax,0xf502c054 <mmu+0x1c> mmu_init+0x16f: movl %eax,0xf502c058 <mmu+0x20> Changing that "andl $0x200,%eax" at "mmu_init+0x144" into an "orl $0x200,%eax" would we a way to disable the X86_PAE feature test: [0]> mmu_init+0x144?w d mmu_init+0x144: 0x25 = 0xd [0]> mmu_init+0x13f::dis ... mmu_init+0x13f: movl 0xf5000774,%eax <x86_feature> mmu_init+0x144: orl $0x200,%eax mmu_init+0x149: je +0x227 <mmu_init+0x376> ... Now try to start the kernel with the "::cont" command: [0]> ::cont This message posted from opensolaris.org
On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 02:37:22AM -0800, J??rgen Keil wrote:> http://src.opensolaris.org/source/xref/onnv/onnv-gate/usr/src/uts/i86pc/vm/hat_i86.c#526 > > 526 if (mmu.pae_hat && (x86_feature & X86_PAE) == 0) > 527 panic("Processor does not support PAE"); > > IMO, under the hypervisor we shouldn''t panic here.Did you file an RFE for this? regards john
John wrote:> On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 02:37:22AM -0800, Jürgen Keil wrote: > > > http://src.opensolaris.org/source/xref/onnv/onnv-gate/usr/src/uts/i86pc/vm/hat_i86.c#526 > > > > 526 if (mmu.pae_hat && (x86_feature & X86_PAE) == 0) > > 527 panic("Processor does not support PAE"); > > > > IMO, under the hypervisor we shouldn't panic here. > > Did you file an RFE for this?No, but there already is bug 6654995 "need clearer message trying to boot xVM on a non-PAE machine": http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6654995 And idea who has filed that bug 6654995? Which model of the "Toshiba Tecra" series was used in 6654995? Is it an "uppc" x86 machine (My Tecra S1 is "uppc") ? An old thread on this issue, with a Tecra M2: http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?messageID=166513 This message posted from opensolaris.org _______________________________________________ xen-discuss mailing list xen-discuss@opensolaris.org
On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 06:44:58AM -0800, J??rgen Keil wrote:> > > IMO, under the hypervisor we shouldn''t panic here. > > > > Did you file an RFE for this? > > No, but there already is bug 6654995 > "need clearer message trying to boot xVM on a non-PAE machine": > > http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6654995 > > And idea who has filed that bug 6654995?It was an internal tester. If we can indeed dynamically adapt in both Xen and Solaris to non-PAE, then obviously fixing that would make this bug irrelevant.> Is it an "uppc" x86 machine (My Tecra S1 is "uppc") ?He didn''t say regards john
John Levon wrote:> On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 06:44:58AM -0800, J??rgen Keil wrote: > > >>>> IMO, under the hypervisor we shouldn''t panic here. >>>> >>> Did you file an RFE for this? >>> >> No, but there already is bug 6654995 >> "need clearer message trying to boot xVM on a non-PAE machine": >> >> http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6654995 >> >> And idea who has filed that bug 6654995? >> > > It was an internal tester. If we can indeed dynamically adapt in both > Xen and Solaris to non-PAE, then obviously fixing that would make this > bug irrelevant. >Solaris x86 10 does still run on non-PAE systems, but aren''t we talking pre-PentiumMMX here, or are there more recent non-PAE systems? I can''t try Nevada after build 14 on my non-PAE systems as they all have a 128Mbyte memory limit on their motherboards which is too small for grub boot. -- Andrew
I wrote:> With old processors (Pentium-M, Pentium-II, > old AMD Athlons) the PAE mmu feature isn''t present.That was not correct: Pentium-II cpus do support PAE. And some Pentium-M cpus do have PAE support, and some don''t. According to wikipedia, the Pentium-M 400 MHz bus versions do not support PAE: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_Address_Extension I''m not sure any more about the AMD Athlons and PAE. Athlon XP does have PAE; I''m not sure about the pre-XP (Athlon Thunderbird). This message posted from opensolaris.org
John wrote:> On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 06:44:58AM -0800, J??rgen Keil wrote: > > > > > IMO, under the hypervisor we shouldn''t panic here. > > > > > > Did you file an RFE for this? > > > > No, but there already is bug 6654995 > > "need clearer message trying to boot xVM on a non-PAE machine": > > > > http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6654995 > > > > And idea who has filed that bug 6654995? > > It was an internal tester. If we can indeed dynamically adapt in both > Xen and Solaris to non-PAE, then obviously fixing that would make this > bug irrelevant.Could the internal tester try my kmdb patch on that Tecra? Or build/install a custom kernel with that panic removed in the "__xpv" case, like this: http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?messageID=166513𨤀 http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/xen-discuss/2007-October/001538.html diff -r 7aad25c79a0f usr/src/uts/i86pc/vm/hat_i86.c --- a/usr/src/uts/i86pc/vm/hat_i86.c Fri Oct 26 11:18:55 2007 -0700 +++ b/usr/src/uts/i86pc/vm/hat_i86.c Sun Oct 28 01:58:29 2007 +0200 @@ -516,7 +516,11 @@ mmu_init(void) } if (mmu.pae_hat && (x86_feature & X86_PAE) == 0) +#if defined(__xpv) + cmn_err(CE_NOTE, "Processor does not support PAE"); +#else panic("Processor does not support PAE"); +#endif if ((x86_feature & X86_CX8) == 0) panic("Processor does not support cmpxchg8b instruction"); How far do we get when the "x86_feature & X86_PAE" test is disabled? This message posted from opensolaris.org
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 09:21:07AM -0800, Ron Bielaski wrote: > > > Results with: > > > > [mvv3.0.4-1-xvm chgset ''Sun Jan 06 11:43:59 2008 -0800 13229:fc49a937b8f7'' > > SunOS Release 5.11 Version snv_79a 32-bit > > Copyright 1983-2007 Sun Microsystems, Inc. All rights reserved. > > Use is subject to license terms. > > (This version of Solaris xVM does not support this hardware) > > Loaded modules: [ scsi_vhci xpv_psm specfs ] > > kmdb: target stopped at: > > kmdb_enter+0xa: pushl %eax > > [0]> > > > Juergen, looks like Ron''s machine is uppc anyway?Yep, most likely. What''s the output from "echo ::interrupts | mdb -k", when Ron''s Toshiba Tecra is booted on metal? Does the interrupt list start with the following header line? (= pcplusmp) IRQ Vect Evtchn IPL Bus Trg Type CPU Share APIC/INT# ISR(s) Or with this one? (= uppc) IRQ Vector IPL(lo/hi) Bus Share ISR(s) In case it''s uppc, we also need a new "uppc" platform kernel module for the i86xpv architecture. I have some patches to add xen uppc to opensolaris.
> I think there are still some issues with the HVM virtual > ATA hardware and OpenSolaris'' ata driver. > See bug 6629177 "ata driver is broken under xVM HVM" > http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6629177 > > Try the workaround from that bug, disable ATA DMA > transfers. Edit the GRUB kernel command line, > " -B ata-dma-enabled=0 " should workI can boot Nevada HVM now. Thanks a lot. BTW, I found X Window can not start when booting Solaris or Nevada Guest. Is it a known issue? Best Regards Jiajun
Xu, Jiajun wrote:>> I think there are still some issues with the HVM virtual >> ATA hardware and OpenSolaris'' ata driver. >> See bug 6629177 "ata driver is broken under xVM HVM" >> http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6629177 >> >> Try the workaround from that bug, disable ATA DMA >> transfers. Edit the GRUB kernel command line, >> " -B ata-dma-enabled=0 " should work >> > > I can boot Nevada HVM now. Thanks a lot. > BTW, I found X Window can not start when booting Solaris or Nevada Guest. Is it a known issue? > > > Best Regards > Jiajun > _______________________________________________ > xen-discuss mailing list > xen-discuss@opensolaris.org >It''s probably with the X11 video drivers, xVM is still missing some guest drivers. You''d want to make it use vesa and craft a new xorg.conf with xorg -config or xorgconfig chosing vesa and 8mb, with the most general input. (PS/2) James