New Mac Pro version of Parallels Desktop causing kernel panics

I

iPalindrome

Bit poster
I have installed the new build of Parallels Desktop and have had two kernel panics in the process of trying to set up new virtual machines (Windows XP). Machine is running 10.4.7 with 3GB of RAM. The only thing that might be a bit off is the fact that I'm putting the VM on a different hard drive than the one Parallels resides on.

Kernel panic happened when Windows XP was about to start installing.

Dumps from the KPs:

Code: 
panic(cpu 1 caller 0x003A2287): getPhysicalSegment() out of 32b range 0x100000000, len 0x48000, class IOGeneralMemoryDescriptor
Backtrace, Format - Frame : Return Address (4 potential args on stack) 
0x3796b938 : 0x128cdb (0x3c99c4 0x3796b95c 0x131cdf 0x0) 
0x3796b978 : 0x3a2287 (0x3edad8 0x0 0x1 0x48000) 
0x3796ba48 : 0x3a41e5 (0x7c11580 0x1b8000 0x0 0x6b38b90) 
0x3796ba68 : 0x5597c67f (0x67e24c0 0x1b8000 0x0 0x67e24c0) 
0x3796baa8 : 0x5597c0db (0x67e2480 0x400000 0x67e2480 0x6d616769) 
0x3796bae8 : 0x5597dd72 (0x54f55000 0x400 0x0 0x54873fd5) 
0x3796bb38 : 0x5597d0a7 (0x77d9f04 0x18 0x600000 0x199103) 
0x3796bbf8 : 0x5597d383 (0x77d9f04 0x3796bec8 0x18 0x3bc94d) 
0x3796bd58 : 0x5597b5c5 (0x77d9f04 0xc0185401 0x3796bec8 0x7890010) 
0x3796bd78 : 0x1f00f7 (0xa000000 0xc0185401 0x3796bec8 0x81) 
0x3796bdb8 : 0x1e7045 (0x3796bde0 0x297 0x3796be18 0x1d09ee) 
0x3796be18 : 0x1deee9 (0x89cc000 0xc0185401 0x3796bec8 0x81) 
0x3796be68 : 0x3305b4 (0x737f580 0xc0185401 0x3796bec8 0x84785dc) 
0x3796be98 : 0x34e881 (0x737f580 0xc0185401 0x3796bec8 0x84785dc) 
0x3796bf68 : 0x378f9c (0x84785dc 0x7a7b780 0x7a7b7c4 0x0) 
0x3796bfc8 : 0x19b0ee (0x725c900 0x0 0x19e0b5 0x5e9ae50) 	Backtrace continues...
      Kernel loadable modules in backtrace (with dependencies):
         com.parallels.kext.vmmain(2.2)@0x5597a000

Kernel version:
Darwin Kernel Version 8.7.2: Tue Jul 25 23:09:54 PDT 2006; root:xnu-792.10.96.obj~3/RELEASE_I386

Model: MacPro1,1, BootROM MP11.005C.B00, 4 processors, Dual-Core Intel Xeon, 2.66 GHz, 3 GB
Graphics: NVIDIA GeForce 7300 GT, NVIDIA GeForce 7300 GT, PCIe, 256 MB
Graphics: NVIDIA GeForce 7300 GT, NVIDIA GeForce 7300 GT, PCIe, 256 MB
Memory Module: DIMM Riser A/DIMM 1, 512 MB, DDR2 FB-DIMM, 667 MHz
Memory Module: DIMM Riser A/DIMM 2, 512 MB, DDR2 FB-DIMM, 667 MHz
Memory Module: DIMM Riser B/DIMM 1, 1 GB, DDR2 FB-DIMM, 667 MHz
Memory Module: DIMM Riser B/DIMM 2, 1 GB, DDR2 FB-DIMM, 667 MHz
Network Service: Built-in Ethernet 1, Ethernet, en0
PCI Card: NVIDIA GeForce 7300 GT, Display, Slot-3
PCI Card: NVIDIA GeForce 7300 GT, Display, Slot-1
Serial ATA Device: ST3250824AS  P, 232.89 GB
Serial ATA Device: Maxtor 6H500F0, 465.76 GB
Serial ATA Device: Maxtor 6H500F0, 465.76 GB
Serial ATA Device: Maxtor 6H500F0, 465.76 GB
Parallel ATA Device: SONY    DVD RW DW-D150A, 672.13 MB
Parallel ATA Device: SONY    DVD RW DW-Q120A
USB Device: Hub, Up to 480 Mb/sec, 500 mA
USB Device: Kensington USB Keyboard, Innovace, Up to 1.5 Mb/sec, 500 mA
USB Device: Apple Optical USB Mouse, Primax Electronics, Up to 1.5 Mb/sec, 500 mA
USB Device: Microsoft Trackball Explorer®, Microsoft, Up to 1.5 Mb/sec, 500 mA
USB Device: Hub, Up to 480 Mb/sec, 500 mA
USB Device: EPSON Scanner, EPSON, Up to 480 Mb/sec, 500 mA
USB Device: Apple Cinema HD Display, Apple Computer, Inc., Up to 12 Mb/sec, 500 mA
USB Device: Hub, Up to 480 Mb/sec, 500 mA
USB Device: RadioSHARK, Griffin Technology, Inc., Up to 12 Mb/sec, 500 mA
USB Device: Plantronics Headset, Plantronics, Up to 12 Mb/sec, 500 mA
FireWire Device: eyetv 200, 0xC6C, Up to 400 Mb/sec
FireWire Device: built-in_hub, unknown_value, Unknown
FireWire Device: OXFORD IDE Device, Macpower, Up to 800 Mb/sec
FireWire Device: iSight, Apple Computer, Inc., Up to 400 Mb/sec
FireWire Device: unknown_device, unknown_value, Unknown

From #2

Code: 
panic(cpu 2 caller 0x003A2287): getPhysicalSegment() out of 32b range 0x11b683000, len 0x1000, class IOGeneralMemoryDescriptor
Backtrace, Format - Frame : Return Address (4 potential args on stack) 
0x37363938 : 0x128cdb (0x3c99c4 0x3736395c 0x131cdf 0x0) 
0x37363978 : 0x3a2287 (0x3edad8 0x1b683000 0x1 0x1000) 
0x37363a48 : 0x3a41e5 (0x6e57200 0x2000 0x0 0x62694c0) 
0x37363a68 : 0xca567f (0x8932b00 0x2000 0x0 0x8932b00) 
0x37363aa8 : 0xca50db (0x8934280 0x400000 0x8934280 0x6d610010) 
0x37363ae8 : 0xca6d72 (0x3657d000 0x400 0x37363b44 0x10) 
0x37363b38 : 0xca60a7 (0x63c4f84 0x18 0x200000 0x199103) 
0x37363bf8 : 0xca6383 (0x63c4f84 0x37363ec8 0x18 0x680fcb8) 
0x37363d58 : 0xca45c5 (0x63c4f84 0xc0185401 0x37363ec8 0x0) 
0x37363d78 : 0x1f00f7 (0xa000000 0xc0185401 0x37363ec8 0x81) 
0x37363db8 : 0x1e7045 (0x37363de0 0x297 0x37363e18 0x1d09ee) 
0x37363e18 : 0x1deee9 (0x7714ef4 0xc0185401 0x37363ec8 0x81) 
0x37363e68 : 0x3305b4 (0x5b352a0 0xc0185401 0x37363ec8 0x6c05dac) 
0x37363e98 : 0x34e881 (0x5b352a0 0xc0185401 0x37363ec8 0x6c05dac) 
0x37363f68 : 0x378f9c (0x6c05dac 0x680fcb8 0x680fcfc 0x0) 
0x37363fc8 : 0x19b0ee (0x68038c0 0x0 0x10 0x68038c0) 	Backtrace continues...
      Kernel loadable modules in backtrace (with dependencies):
         com.parallels.kext.vmmain(2.2)@0xca3000

Kernel version:
Darwin Kernel Version 8.7.2: Tue Jul 25 23:09:54 PDT 2006; root:xnu-792.10.96.obj~3/RELEASE_I386

Model: MacPro1,1, BootROM MP11.005C.B00, 4 processors, Dual-Core Intel Xeon, 2.66 GHz, 3 GB
Graphics: NVIDIA GeForce 7300 GT, NVIDIA GeForce 7300 GT, PCIe, 256 MB
Graphics: NVIDIA GeForce 7300 GT, NVIDIA GeForce 7300 GT, PCIe, 256 MB
Memory Module: DIMM Riser A/DIMM 1, 512 MB, DDR2 FB-DIMM, 667 MHz
Memory Module: DIMM Riser A/DIMM 2, 512 MB, DDR2 FB-DIMM, 667 MHz
Memory Module: DIMM Riser B/DIMM 1, 1 GB, DDR2 FB-DIMM, 667 MHz
Memory Module: DIMM Riser B/DIMM 2, 1 GB, DDR2 FB-DIMM, 667 MHz
Network Service: Built-in Ethernet 1, Ethernet, en0
PCI Card: NVIDIA GeForce 7300 GT, Display, Slot-3
PCI Card: NVIDIA GeForce 7300 GT, Display, Slot-1
Serial ATA Device: ST3250824AS  P, 232.89 GB
Serial ATA Device: Maxtor 6H500F0, 465.76 GB
Serial ATA Device: Maxtor 6H500F0, 465.76 GB
Serial ATA Device: Maxtor 6H500F0, 465.76 GB
Parallel ATA Device: SONY    DVD RW DW-D150A, 672.13 MB
Parallel ATA Device: SONY    DVD RW DW-Q120A
USB Device: Hub, Up to 480 Mb/sec, 500 mA
USB Device: Kensington USB Keyboard, Innovace, Up to 1.5 Mb/sec, 500 mA
USB Device: Apple Optical USB Mouse, Primax Electronics, Up to 1.5 Mb/sec, 500 mA
USB Device: Microsoft Trackball Explorer®, Microsoft, Up to 1.5 Mb/sec, 500 mA
USB Device: Hub, Up to 480 Mb/sec, 500 mA
USB Device: EPSON Scanner, EPSON, Up to 480 Mb/sec, 500 mA
USB Device: Apple Cinema HD Display, Apple Computer, Inc., Up to 12 Mb/sec, 500 mA
USB Device: Hub, Up to 480 Mb/sec, 500 mA
USB Device: Plantronics Headset, Plantronics, Up to 12 Mb/sec, 500 mA
USB Device: RadioSHARK, Griffin Technology, Inc., Up to 12 Mb/sec, 500 mA
FireWire Device: eyetv 200, 0xC6C, Up to 400 Mb/sec
FireWire Device: built-in_hub, unknown_value, Unknown
FireWire Device: OXFORD IDE Device, Macpower, Up to 800 Mb/sec
FireWire Device: iSight, Apple Computer, Inc., Up to 400 Mb/sec
FireWire Device: unknown_device, unknown_value, Unknown
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
My Mac Pro was a stock dual 2.66GHz model with 1GB RAM. I upgraded it to 3GB with OWC's chips. I also added three 500GB hard drives to the other three bays with two of them set up as a RAID 0 and the third set up as a Windows Vista Build 5536 (pre-RC1) under Boot Camp 1.1.

When I start my WinXP VM, it'll give me the VT-X error as seen by many here. If I sleep my Mac Pro and then wake it up and start Parallels and the VM, it will kernel panic reliably. So I'm running my VM SLOWLY with VT-X off. At least it works.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
SiskoKid said:
I have 2GB and the ATI x1900 card, and I'm not having kernel panics (I don't go to a white screen and restart) but it chokes when installing or opening the Windows XP OS and I have to restart. I did get it to install once, and while it was functioning fine it choked again, couldn't move my mouse it just went into that color spinning ball, so I restarted again and coudn't get back into the OS. I get that VTx message so I can't install or get back into the OS, so I always have to do a fresh install of Parallels.

I just wanted to make it clear that I don't have more than 2GB and I have an ATI card, and I still have issues.
Click to expand...

Oh I'm not saying that Parallels works like a charm with 2GB... it seems horribly messed up even for most 2GB users from what I have seen. But at least it isn't an instant reproducable Kernel Panic every time.

I'm not sure I call that progress though. :)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
mvk said:
Of course, if I have to run terminal commands and reboot just to run Parralles, then reboot to get back all of my memory, might as well use Bootcamp with less hassle.
Click to expand...

Exactly. BootCamp requires a reboot anyway, and is faster and reliable with the SATA fix. (And automagically limits your ram to 2GB! haha)

Parallels is a great program and works great on my MacBook Pro. I look forward to the day they can sort out this mess on the Mac Pro.

I suspect they will see similar or identical problems on the new Core 2 Duo iMacs if those machines are loaded with 3GB of RAM as they can be now.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
finally works!

OK...
MacPro 2.6/3 gig ram - maxmem'd down to 2 gig (via ben's comments in parallels blog)
Latest version of Parallels re-installed
Installed xp
works like a champ!

1280x1024 resolution
parallels tools installed - all functioning fine
everything solid so far, about an hour of time. Shutdown/re-started xp several times thru vm and natively
unable to get internet access as of yet but working on it

if I can get this working...anyone can...lol
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Can't get it to work here, at all.

Mac Pro, 4gb -- set boot args to 3500. Set the sleep thing.
Install Parallels - install windows xp. KP when Win XP finishes loading and tries to reboot itself. I have tried to remove the disk immediately, it makes no difference.

This isn't beta software, it's unworkable.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Me Too

I have a pretty standard setup - 2.66 Mac Pro. I can't even start parallels without it killing my mac. I have 2 gigs of memory, 3 hard drives, and the rest is stock. Good to see that I am not alone in this matter. I don't feel like goofing around trying to get this to work. I'm a realtor, and it would be nice to use IE 6 and a few other apps, and not have to boot into boot camp, but I don't want to jump through hoops to use this software. I wondered how it was going to work, now I know. It doesn't. Even at beta stage it should do what it says. This should not have been released. Crossover is fine but you cannot update any of the softs you install, and it's very limited. Runnin windows in boot camp is still slower than running native on a PC. Kind of a drag.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I guess I must be lucky.
My installation is running just fine with zero errors, problems or Kernal Panics.

I am running a MacPRO, 2.66ghz, 2 GB memory, 2 each 500GB drives.
OSX 10.4.7

However my installation proceedure was different than any that I have seen mentioned.

Following was my proceedure.

I had the original RELEASED version of Parallels running just fine on my MacBook with 2gb memory and Windows XP home.

I used the Apple Migration Utility to move EVERYTHING from my MacBook to my MacPRO.
And of course when I tried to start parallels, I had problems similar to others.
So I waited for the latest MacPRO beta release.

I simply installed it OVER the exisiting ORIGINAL release version.
And VOILA! it came up running just fine. No kernal Panics, no errors.
Running numerous apps..

The only problems that I am having are all releated to variious USB problems, most of which existed prior to this MacPRO Beta. But I do have Internet connection, networking (via Airport Extreme) , MS Office, and a half dozen rather obscure programs that I need for my own projects. All seem to be working fine.

I was even able to print to my network connected HP Laserjet AND my old HP Inkhjet 960 USB printer. I am NOT able to talk to my older Epson 1650 Scanner due to USB problems.

Note that I never did install the intermediate Update that Parallels posted. '
I went straight from the Original RELEASED version to the latest MacPRO beta.
That, and the fact that I am only running 2 megs of memory, may be part of my accidental success story here.

It does seem that they have LOT of work to do in getting USB to work correctly but I am hoping that comes shortly..

And lastly, boot up and Disk Intensive operations under Parallels are much faster than Boot Camp, due to the very slow PATA disk I/O under Boot Camp. I sure hope Apple can get that fixed as well.

Harley
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I've had no success in getting Parallels working with WINXP SP2. Along with the kernal panics and VT-x issues using the new Beta version released yesterday, I also have an issue where I uninstall Parallels using the uninstall application and then try to reinstall Parallels in order to have a fresh start. However, the new Parallels installation then attempts to find a prior installed Virtual Machine and doesn't ask for a serial number upon initial startup after the new install. This leads me to believe that there are some files lurking somewhere that weren't removed with 'uninstall.' Anyone know which files must be removed in order to TOTALLY remove Parallels?

I am running a MacPro with 3GB RAM.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
This Mac Pro Issue

I have read all the posts guys, I am just wondering through all the technical talk which
I don't understand, is this issue resolved in the latest release or is buying this for my new mac pro just a waste of time? In two weeks I have to go onsite to a customers place of business and set up a room full of mac pro's and they all are needing a windows solutions and are not interested in dual booting. Any ideas answers would be greatly appreciated.

Steve
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
flyboy said:
I have read all the posts guys, I am just wondering through all the technical talk which
I don't understand, is this issue resolved in the latest release or is buying this for my new mac pro just a waste of time? In two weeks I have to go onsite to a customers place of business and set up a room full of mac pro's and they all are needing a windows solutions and are not interested in dual booting. Any ideas answers would be greatly appreciated.

Steve
Click to expand...

It might work, it might not, you definately don't want more that 3GB of memory on them. But, IMO, PD is not ready for production now, and I doubt it will be in 2 weeks.

It flat doesn't work in my machine:
2.6 GHz
3 GB memory
3 320GB Drives
1 300GB Drive
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
1884 flat does not work...(well, I'll take that back, a little progress. See edit.)

verden said:
It might work, it might not, you definately don't want more that 3GB of memory on them. But, IMO, PD is not ready for production now, and I doubt it will be in 2 weeks.

It flat doesn't work in my machine:
2.6 GHz
3 GB memory
3 320GB Drives
1 300GB Drive
Click to expand...

Nor mine...
2.66 ghz
3 gb memory
1-250gb 2-320gb 1-750gb
I just received the RC email and I thought, oh good, they fixed yesterdays 1884, but no same thing.
Windows XP SP2 crashes on first install boot. After rebooting the Mac Pro when I start the VM, I get the same black Windows boot screen and then it returns to the Parallels properties screen. This forum is full of similar accounts or kernal panics when starting the VM.
I can not believe Parallels sent out the general RC announcement when it flat does not work.

Edit: After removing 1gb of physical RAM I was able to get completely through the WinXP SP2 Install. I have no idea if 3gb of RAM was the problem. I will reinstall it after I work through the rest of the bugs like networking etc...
I'm sorry, but I still do not understand how they can call this a Release Candidate.
If part of the problem is Apple and the VT-x, then it is not a Release Candidate until that gets fixed.
I will say that I am glad they released this beta, it just should have been left at that.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
artpease said:
Nor mine...
This forum is full of similar accounts or kernal panics when starting the VM.
I can not believe Parallels sent out the general RC announcement when it flat does not work.
Click to expand...

However, there are also many reports in this forum to the effect that (sometimes after a few initial glitches are worked out) it does work—it works for me—and anyhow, remember that those who are not having problems don't usually post! Since Parallels has been taking it on the chin for issues that many believe are essentially an Apple problem (viz., the VT-x issue), the folks at Parallels can hardly be blamed for wanting to get something out as soon as possible—and after all, they clearly state that the RC is a beta.

This is not to say that those who can't get Parallels Desktop to run should not be upset; it's just to say that Parallels is trying to resolve the issues, and at least they've got a program that's currently available to use, which is more than can be said for VMware. I'd be very surprised if they didn't post a bug fix within the next week or two.

My $.02.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Hypervisor Error !

I have a standard Mac Pro (1 GB ram (2*512), 250 GB HDD).

I have installed parallels (from the install disc), upgraded it with Parallels-Desktop-1884-Mac.dmg, rebooted, and still get the "Unable to communicate with hypervisor!" error.

I have put the Mac Pro to sleep...same error, rebooted...same error.
Re-installed the original version, upgraded again, rebooted...and still the hypervisor error.

Then I completely uninstalled this mess (including deleting all the VM files from the Library), and repeated the rebooting process...same error. What is going on? Can someone please give me a step-by-step proceedure to get this working....could I have a MacLemon :confused: ???

Thank you in advance. ...;)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Me Too!

After installing the terminal script to get over the 4Gb RAM problem and rebooting, I can get as far as the NTFS format request and it KP's there. Tried complete strip out and reinstall but same problem 3 times. I've given up for the while and will wait for the next incarnation.:mad:
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I started out okay, but now I get KP about 2 out of every 3 Windows bootups. After the usual KP, I start Parallels before I start anything else and then it seems less likely to KP, but still KPs more often than not. I too will have to wait for the next release to hopefully run Parallels on my Mac Pro.

Mac Pro 2.66 Ghz
3 GB RAM
150 GB stock HD
130 GB additional internal HD

A thought: It seems there are a number of KP'ers with more than one hard drive in the Mac Pro. Any chance having more than one drive installed could cause problems? Anyone with KPs and multiple drives want to try going to 1 drive and running Parallels?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
jbmelby said:
H, the folks at Parallels can hardly be blamed for wanting to get something out as soon as possible—and after all, they clearly state that the RC is a beta.
...

My $.02.
Click to expand...

An RC is *not* supposed to be a beta. A RC is supposed to be a feature complete ware that's passed a beta stage, which is where it's supposed to be checked out on many different configurations. Now Apple's marketing has suggested there are several million possible Mac Pro variations, but that's largely crap. There are fewer meaningful permutations of Mac Pros than there are of something like, say, Vista...

And, not that I love, MS, but even Vista's *beta* runs on my box.

They should have called this an early beta, or, what it really is, an alpha.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
BlueSkyISdotCOM said:
I too will have to wait for the next release to hopefully run Parallels on my Mac Pro.

A thought: It seems there are a number of KP'ers with more than one hard drive in the Mac Pro. Any chance having more than one drive installed could cause problems? Anyone with KPs and multiple drives want to try going to 1 drive and running Parallels?
Click to expand...

I have two hard drives as well, but I can't really see that that would be the problem. I'm pretty sure it's just lame at allocating memory correctly.

My advice: download the "stable" old 1848 build and use the -legacy workaround. It did much, much better for me.

I'll take a few hypervisor errors over a KP anyday.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
stormj said:
I have two hard drives as well, but I can't really see that that would be the problem. I'm pretty sure it's just lame at allocating memory correctly.

My advice: download the "stable" old 1848 build and use the -legacy workaround. It did much, much better for me.

I'll take a few hypervisor errors over a KP anyday.
Click to expand...


Ignore my advice. It doesn't work, at least for me.

I was unable to revert to 1848. All of a sudden, the VM I was using for almost a month won't work on the old build, after a few days of playing with 1884.

What a mess.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top