From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:48586)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <chris@arachsys.com>) id 1SF6kD-0006c2-RF
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 03 Apr 2012 12:38:16 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <chris@arachsys.com>) id 1SF6k7-0004DS-Vo
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 03 Apr 2012 12:38:09 -0400
Received: from alpha.arachsys.com ([91.203.57.7]:49455)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <chris@arachsys.com>) id 1SF6k7-0004D7-Ps
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 03 Apr 2012 12:38:03 -0400
Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2012 17:37:59 +0100
From: Chris Webb <chris@arachsys.com>
Message-ID: <20120403163758.GM21688@arachsys.com>
References: <20120402153722.GA30499@arachsys.com>
	<20120403071328.GB27304@stefanha-thinkpad.localdomain>
	<20120403081313.GD1283@arachsys.com>
	<CAJSP0QV53ceKOMvUhvsTsb5wOwKQYmLRdqnze8oeE0DhtiFh0w@mail.gmail.com>
	<20120403124217.GN1283@arachsys.com>
	<CAJSP0QXvvHV_gC3BTjJWVX5ELEbajPsN9vb58gXXi8kd9_x1oQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<20120403134146.GF28553@arachsys.com>
	<CAJSP0QUcS-sW4JUJAMz5dDrcHpS63LPxz6odPUdnLibPEzaehA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAJSP0QUcS-sW4JUJAMz5dDrcHpS63LPxz6odPUdnLibPEzaehA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Intermittent e1000 failure on qemu-kvm 1.0
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@gmail.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@gmail.com> writes:


> >> Are you sure no other guest has the same MAC address or IP address?
> >> This weird behavior sounds similar to what happens when you have
> >> multiple devices on a network using the same address - the results are
> >> very confusing :).
> >
> > Yes, I agree! However, in this case there's no other guest with the same MAC
> > or IP address on the network. I've explicitly rechecked this to be sure, and
> > also deliberately varied the MAC address to something I know can't be
> > generated by our scripts. In any case, I'm using the same MAC and IP address
> > for every reboot of this VM, and usually (19 times out of 20) it works fine.
> 
> The lack of ARP reply is a host networking problem.  Have you checked
> host dmesg(1) output just in case there was a kernel message related
> to this?

Nothing there I'm afraid. Just the usual

  device tap1 entered promiscuous mode
  ADDRCONF(NETDEV_UP): tap1: link is not ready
  ADDRCONF(NETDEV_CHANGE): tap1: link becomes ready
  br0: port 2(tap1) entering forwarding state
  br0: port 2(tap1) entering forwarding state
  kvm: 20288: cpu0 unhandled rdmsr: 0xc0010112
  kvm: 20288: cpu0 unhandled rdmsr: 0xc0010048
  tap1: no IPv6 routers present
  br0: port 2(tap1) entering forwarding state
  br0: port 2(tap1) entering forwarding state
  br0: port 2(tap1) entering forwarding state
  br0: port 2(tap1) entering forwarding state
  br0: port 2(tap1) entering disabled state

cycle. It looks just the same for a working guest as for a non-working
guest.

Best wishes,

Chris.