search for: __pmd_alloc

...===== --- work-pv.orig/mm/memory.c +++ work-pv/mm/memory.c @@ -2798,3 +2798,10 @@ int access_process_vm(struct task_struct return buf - old_buf; } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(access_process_vm); + +/* temp until we put the hv vm stuff into the kernel */ +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__pud_alloc); +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__pmd_alloc); +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__pte_alloc_kernel); +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pmd_clear_bad); +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pud_clear_bad); --

...===== --- work-pv.orig/mm/memory.c +++ work-pv/mm/memory.c @@ -2798,3 +2798,10 @@ int access_process_vm(struct task_struct return buf - old_buf; } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(access_process_vm); + +/* temp until we put the hv vm stuff into the kernel */ +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__pud_alloc); +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__pmd_alloc); +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__pte_alloc_kernel); +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pmd_clear_bad); +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pud_clear_bad); --

..._wp_page |--1.77%-- handle_pte_fault |--1.58%-- do_anonymous_page |--1.56%-- rmqueue_bulk.clone.0 |--1.35%-- copy_pte_range |--1.25%-- zap_pte_range |--1.13%-- cache_flusharray |--0.88%-- __pmd_alloc |--0.70%-- wake_up_new_task |--0.66%-- __pud_alloc |--0.59%-- ext4_discard_preallocations --6.53%-- [...] With the qspinlock patch, the perf profile at 1000 users was: 3.25% reaim [kernel.kallsyms] [k] queue_spin_lock_slowp...

..._wp_page |--1.77%-- handle_pte_fault |--1.58%-- do_anonymous_page |--1.56%-- rmqueue_bulk.clone.0 |--1.35%-- copy_pte_range |--1.25%-- zap_pte_range |--1.13%-- cache_flusharray |--0.88%-- __pmd_alloc |--0.70%-- wake_up_new_task |--0.66%-- __pud_alloc |--0.59%-- ext4_discard_preallocations --6.53%-- [...] With the qspinlock patch, the perf profile at 1000 users was: 3.25% reaim [kernel.kallsyms] [k] queue_spin_lock_slowp...

...x32/0x1c0 > [ 7.276424] ? __handle_mm_fault+0xc85/0x3140 > [ 7.276433] ? lock_downgrade+0x5e0/0x5e0 > [ 7.276439] ? mem_cgroup_commit_charge+0xb4/0xf80 > [ 7.276453] ? _raw_spin_unlock+0x24/0x30 > [ 7.276458] ? __handle_mm_fault+0xc85/0x3140 > [ 7.276467] ? __pmd_alloc+0x430/0x430 > [ 7.276473] ? find_held_lock+0x32/0x1c0 > [ 7.276485] ? __fget_light+0x55/0x1f0 > [ 7.276497] ? __sys_sendmsg+0xd2/0x170 > [ 7.276502] __sys_sendmsg+0xd2/0x170 > [ 7.276508] ? __ia32_sys_shutdown+0x70/0x70 > [ 7.276516] ? handle_mm_fault+0x1f9...

Hello list, I just got this ominous bug on my machine, that has already been seen several times: http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-devel/2006-01/msg00180.html The machine is very similar, it''s a machine with two dual-core opterons, running one of the latest xen-3.0.3-unstable (20060926 hypervisor, and a vanilla 2.6.18 + xen patch from Fedora from 20060915). This machine was

...36.072170] vhost_update_used_flags+0x379/0x480 [ 36.076895] vhost_vq_init_access+0xca/0x540 [ 36.081276] vhost_net_ioctl+0xee0/0x1920 [ 36.085397] ? vhost_net_stop_vq+0xf0/0xf0 [ 36.089603] ? avc_ss_reset+0x110/0x110 [ 36.093547] ? __handle_mm_fault+0x5ba/0x38c0 [ 36.098012] ? __pmd_alloc+0x4e0/0x4e0 [ 36.101869] ? trace_hardirqs_off+0x10/0x10 [ 36.106161] ? __fd_install+0x25f/0x740 [ 36.110106] ? find_held_lock+0x35/0x1d0 [ 36.114145] ? check_same_owner+0x320/0x320 [ 36.118438] ? rcu_note_context_switch+0x710/0x710 [ 36.123334] ? __do_page_fault+0x5f7/0xc90 [ 36...

...all Trace: <ffffffff801512ad>{bad_page+93} > > <ffffffff80151d57>{get_page_from_freelist+775} > > Oct 3 23:27:52 tuek <ffffffff80151f1d>{__alloc_pages+157} > > <ffffffff80152249>{get_zeroed_page+73} > > Oct 3 23:27:52 tuek <ffffffff80158cf4>{__pmd_alloc+36} > > <ffffffff8015e55e>{copy_page_range+1262} > > Oct 3 23:27:52 tuek <ffffffff802a6bea>{rb_insert_color+250} > > <ffffffff80127cb7>{copy_process+3079} > > Oct 3 23:27:52 tuek <ffffffff80128c8e>{do_fork+238} > > <ffffffff801710d6>{...

I''m sure everyone has seen the drop of VMI patches for Linux at this point, but just in case, the link is included below. I''ve read this version of the VMI spec and have made my way through most of the patches. While I wasn''t really that impressed with the first spec wrt Xen, the second version seems to be much more palatable. Specifically, the code inlining and

Hi Waiman, As promised; here is the paravirt stuff I did during the trip to BOS last week. All the !paravirt patches are more or less the same as before (the only real change is the copyright lines in the first patch). The paravirt stuff is 'simple' and KVM only -- the Xen code was a little more convoluted and I've no real way to test that but it should be stright fwd to make work.

Hi Waiman, As promised; here is the paravirt stuff I did during the trip to BOS last week. All the !paravirt patches are more or less the same as before (the only real change is the copyright lines in the first patch). The paravirt stuff is 'simple' and KVM only -- the Xen code was a little more convoluted and I've no real way to test that but it should be stright fwd to make work.

...8%-- do_wp_page |--1.77%-- handle_pte_fault |--1.58%-- do_anonymous_page |--1.56%-- rmqueue_bulk.clone.0 |--1.35%-- copy_pte_range |--1.25%-- zap_pte_range |--1.13%-- cache_flusharray |--0.88%-- __pmd_alloc |--0.70%-- wake_up_new_task |--0.66%-- __pud_alloc |--0.59%-- ext4_discard_preallocations --6.53%-- [...] With the qspinlock patch, the perf profile at 1000 users was: 3.25% reaim [kernel.kallsyms] [k] queue_spin_lock_slowpath...

...8%-- do_wp_page |--1.77%-- handle_pte_fault |--1.58%-- do_anonymous_page |--1.56%-- rmqueue_bulk.clone.0 |--1.35%-- copy_pte_range |--1.25%-- zap_pte_range |--1.13%-- cache_flusharray |--0.88%-- __pmd_alloc |--0.70%-- wake_up_new_task |--0.66%-- __pud_alloc |--0.59%-- ext4_discard_preallocations --6.53%-- [...] With the qspinlock patch, the perf profile at 1000 users was: 3.25% reaim [kernel.kallsyms] [k] queue_spin_lock_slowpath...

...8%-- do_wp_page |--1.77%-- handle_pte_fault |--1.58%-- do_anonymous_page |--1.56%-- rmqueue_bulk.clone.0 |--1.35%-- copy_pte_range |--1.25%-- zap_pte_range |--1.13%-- cache_flusharray |--0.88%-- __pmd_alloc |--0.70%-- wake_up_new_task |--0.66%-- __pud_alloc |--0.59%-- ext4_discard_preallocations --6.53%-- [...] With the qspinlock patch, the perf profile at 1000 users was: 3.25% reaim [kernel.kallsyms] [k] queue_spin_lock_slowpath...

...8%-- do_wp_page |--1.77%-- handle_pte_fault |--1.58%-- do_anonymous_page |--1.56%-- rmqueue_bulk.clone.0 |--1.35%-- copy_pte_range |--1.25%-- zap_pte_range |--1.13%-- cache_flusharray |--0.88%-- __pmd_alloc |--0.70%-- wake_up_new_task |--0.66%-- __pud_alloc |--0.59%-- ext4_discard_preallocations --6.53%-- [...] With the qspinlock patch, the perf profile at 1000 users was: 3.25% reaim [kernel.kallsyms] [k] queue_spin_lock_slowpath...