From: Gerald R. <ri...@ec...> - 2005-04-08 09:20:50
|
Hi, I have running UML with a 2.4.27 kernel for sometime on SUSE 9.1 with = kernel 2.6.5-7.111-default without any problems. After upgrading to SUSE 9.2 (kernel 2.6.8-24.14-default) UML crahs on = start up (see below). If I boot again with the old kernel (but the new = system), anythings works again.=20 Does anybody have any idea what's wrong or where I can start to debug = this? Thanks & Regards Gerald Checking for the skas3 patch in the host...found Checking for /proc/mm...found Checking PROT_EXEC mmap in /tmp...OK Kernel virtual memory size shrunk to 258998272 bytes Checking for /dev/anon on the host...Not available (open failed with = errno 2) Linux version 2.4.27um (root@master) (gcc version 2.95.3 200103 15 (SuSE)) #4 Mon Dec 27 20:08:49 MET 2004 On node 0 totalpages: 65536 zone(0): 65536 pages. zone(1): 0 pages. zone(2): 0 pages. Kernel command line: eth0=3Dtuntap,,,10.11.12.50 mem=3D256M fastboot=3D1 ubd0=3Dbb53.cow ,root_fs root=3D/dev/ubd0 Calibrating delay loop... 3761.76 BogoMIPS Memory: 252488k available Dentry cache hash table entries: 32768 (order: 6, 262144 bytes) Inode cache hash table entries: 16384 (order: 5, 131072 bytes) Mount cache hash table entries: 512 (order: 0, 4096 bytes) Buffer cache hash table entries: 16384 (order: 4, 65536 bytes) Page-cache hash table entries: 65536 (order: 6, 262144 bytes) Checking for host processor cmov support...Yes Checking for host processor xmm support...No Checking that ptrace can change system call numbers...OK Checking syscall emulation patch for ptrace...<0>Kernel panic: = check_ptrace : ch ild exited with status 0x100 In idle task - not syncing <6>SysRq : Show Regs EIP: 0000:[<00000000>] CPU: 0 Not tainted EFLAGS: 00000000 Not tainted EAX: 00000000 EBX: 00000000 ECX: 00000000 EDX: 00000000 ESI: 00000000 EDI: 00000000 EBP: 00000000 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 Call Trace: [<a027e79c>] [<a0013bef>] [<a010d078>] [<a027e799>] = [<a027e726>] [<a010cfea>] [<a00f757d>] [<a02bbcfd>] [<a0013bef>] [<a001e0da>] [<a0212aee>] [<a0279960>] [<a0013bef>] [<a0279960>] [<a0013127>] [<a0013113>] [<a022a949>] [<a00f1aac>] [<a0279960>] [<a00078a4>] [<a00fc220>] [<a0258e18>] [<a0007e6d>] [<a0002552>] [<a00fc245>] [<a00fc220>] [<a00f1b29>] [<a00fc220>] [<a00f1b0e>] [<a00fbf56>] [<a00fc220>] [<a021a5c8>] [<a021a631>] -------------------------------------------------------------------------= -- Gerald Richter ecos electronic communication services gmbh IT-Securityl=F6sungen * Webapplikationen mit = Apache/Perl/mod_perl/Embperl Post: Tulpenstrasse 5 D-55276 Dienheim b. Mainz E-Mail: ri...@ec... Voice: +49 6133 939-122 WWW: http://www.ecos.de/ Fax: +49 6133 939-333 -------------------------------------------------------------------------= -- ECOS BB-5000 Firewall- und IT-Security Appliance: www.bb-5000.info -------------------------------------------------------------------------= -- =20 |
From: Blaisorblade <bla...@ya...> - 2005-04-08 09:37:16
|
On Friday 08 April 2005 11:20, Gerald Richter wrote: > Hi, > > I have running UML with a 2.4.27 kernel for sometime on SUSE 9.1 with > kernel 2.6.5-7.111-default without any problems. > > After upgrading to SUSE 9.2 (kernel 2.6.8-24.14-default) UML crahs on start > up (see below). If I boot again with the old kernel (but the new system), > anythings works again. > Does anybody have any idea what's wrong or where I can start to debug this? Going by memory, this was because earlier SYSEMU patches were buggy. Recent UML refuse to run on earlier buggy SKAS patch revision. Older ones seemed to run well, but crashed due to the SYSEMU bug, for instance, when you did echo 0 > /proc/sysemu, and strace didn't work well, and so on. So: compile a recent UML kernel (2.6.11-bs3 or 2.6.9-bs7, see my homepage). I don't know what SuSE has for this, so I'm CC:ing to Gerd Knorr. -- Paolo Giarrusso, aka Blaisorblade Linux registered user n. 292729 http://www.user-mode-linux.org/~blaisorblade |
From: Gerald R. <ri...@ec...> - 2005-04-08 18:35:36
|
> Going by memory, this was because earlier SYSEMU patches were > buggy. Recent UML refuse to run on earlier buggy SKAS patch > revision. Older ones seemed to run well, but crashed due to > the SYSEMU bug, for instance, when you did echo 0 > > /proc/sysemu, and strace didn't work well, and so on. > > So: compile a recent UML kernel (2.6.11-bs3 or 2.6.9-bs7, see > my homepage). I don't know what SuSE has for this, so I'm > CC:ing to Gerd Knorr. Mmmh, I looked through your site and I am not quite sure if understand correctly. I have a guest system which is a linux 2.4.27 with uml_patch-2.4.27-1.bz2 applied. (I have compiled the kernel on my own) The host is the SuSE 9.2 kernel. Is the sysemu patch part of the uml_patch-2.4.27-1.bz2 at all? Or is it only included if I apply your additional patches? Since I need to keep the SuSE kernel for the host system for various reasons, would it solve the problem, if I include the commandline syemu patch in the guest kernel and start it with nosysemu parameter? Thanks Gerald |
From: Blaisorblade <bla...@ya...> - 2005-04-10 11:33:06
|
On Friday 08 April 2005 20:35, Gerald Richter wrote: > > Going by memory, this was because earlier SYSEMU patches were > > buggy. Recent UML refuse to run on earlier buggy SKAS patch > > revision. Older ones seemed to run well, but crashed due to > > the SYSEMU bug, for instance, when you did echo 0 > > > /proc/sysemu, and strace didn't work well, and so on. > > > > So: compile a recent UML kernel (2.6.11-bs3 or 2.6.9-bs7, see > > my homepage). I don't know what SuSE has for this, so I'm > > CC:ing to Gerd Knorr. > > Mmmh, I looked through your site and I am not quite sure if understand > correctly. > > > I have a guest system which is a linux 2.4.27 with uml_patch-2.4.27-1.bz2 > applied. (I have compiled the kernel on my own) > > The host is the SuSE 9.2 kernel. > > Is the sysemu patch part of the uml_patch-2.4.27-1.bz2 at all? Or is it > only included if I apply your additional patches? Wait - who's "you"? You are talking about the main UML site, managed by Jeff Dike, http://user-mode-linux.sourceforge.net/patches.html right? My site is entirely different (link in my signature), though we *do* work together. Well, the incrementals page is a bit of a mess for 2.4. The complete series applies on top of 2.4.26-3um (or rather, it should, but I've had some problems with some of them), while 2.4.27-1um includes patches up to (and included) "2.4.27". > Since I need to keep the SuSE kernel for the host system for various > reasons, would it solve the problem, if I include the commandline syemu > patch in the guest kernel and start it with nosysemu parameter? I'm almost sure an updated SuSE kernel would solve this. However, an even better solution is to use the -bs1 patch from my site (look at the instructions, it's split in two parts). It does not include the SYSEMU patches so it will work well on your host. -- Paolo Giarrusso, aka Blaisorblade Linux registered user n. 292729 http://www.user-mode-linux.org/~blaisorblade |
From: Gerd K. <kr...@by...> - 2005-04-11 10:30:25
|
> > Since I need to keep the SuSE kernel for the host system for various > > reasons, would it solve the problem, if I include the commandline syemu > > patch in the guest kernel and start it with nosysemu parameter? > I'm almost sure an updated SuSE kernel would solve this. There are some uml updates for 9.2, not sure the (host) sysemu fix is in the 9.2 update kernels though. 9.1 kernels are fine, these predate the sysemu support and thus also don't include buggy sysemu support ;) 9.3 or a kernel-of-the-day (http://ftp.suse.com/pub/projects/kernel/kotd/i386/HEAD/) should be fine as well. Gerd -- #define printk(args...) fprintf(stderr, ## args) |
From: Gerald R. <ri...@ec...> - 2005-04-13 08:59:17
|
Hi, > > > > Since I need to keep the SuSE kernel for the host system > for various > > > reasons, would it solve the problem, if I include the commandline > > > syemu patch in the guest kernel and start it with > nosysemu parameter? > > I'm almost sure an updated SuSE kernel would solve this. > > There are some uml updates for 9.2, not sure the (host) > sysemu fix is in the 9.2 update kernels though. > > 9.1 kernels are fine, these predate the sysemu support and > thus also don't include buggy sysemu support ;) > > 9.3 or a kernel-of-the-day > (http://ftp.suse.com/pub/projects/kernel/kotd/i386/HEAD/) > should be fine as well. > Changeing the guest from 2.4.27-um1 (from sourceforge) to -bs1 (from ~blaisorblade) makes the guest kernel panic a little later, so it didn't solve my problem. But yesterday, I received the SuSE 9.3 update and with the 9.3 kernel both guest versions works again! Thanks Gerald |