Re: Biweekly KVM Test report, kernel 51bfd299... qemu a1fce560...

Kevin Wolf
2012-06-04T13:51:25Z

Am 01.06.2012 10:31, schrieb Kevin Wolf:
> Am 01.06.2012 09:57, schrieb Ren, Yongjie:
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Marcelo Tosatti [mailto:mtosatti@redhat.com]
>>> Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2012 4:28 AM
>>> To: Ren, Yongjie
>>> Cc: Kevin Wolf; Avi Kivity; kvm@vger.kernel.org; Liu, RongrongX
>>> Subject: Re: Biweekly KVM Test report, kernel 51bfd299... qemu
>>> a1fce560...
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 07:40:29AM +0000, Ren, Yongjie wrote:
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Kevin Wolf [mailto:kwolf@redhat.com]
>>>>> Sent: Monday, May 21, 2012 11:30 PM
>>>>> To: Ren, Yongjie
>>>>> Cc: Avi Kivity; kvm@vger.kernel.org; Liu, RongrongX
>>>>> Subject: Re: Biweekly KVM Test report, kernel 51bfd299... qemu
>>>>> a1fce560...
>>>>>
>>>>> Am 21.05.2012 11:45, schrieb Ren, Yongjie:
>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>> From: Kevin Wolf [mailto:kwolf@redhat.com]
>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, May 21, 2012 5:05 PM
>>>>>>> To: Avi Kivity
>>>>>>> Cc: Ren, Yongjie; kvm@vger.kernel.org
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: Biweekly KVM Test report, kernel 51bfd299... qemu
>>>>>>> a1fce560...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Am 21.05.2012 10:27, schrieb Avi Kivity:
>>>>>>>> On 05/21/2012 06:34 AM, Ren, Yongjie wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This is KVM upstream test result against kvm.git
>>>>>>> 51bfd2998113e1f8ce8dcf853407b76a04b5f2a0 based on kernel
>>>>> 3.4.0-rc7,
>>>>>>> and qemu-kvm.git a1fce560c0e5f287ed65d2aaadb3e59578aaa983.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> We found 1 new bug and 1 bug got fixed in the past two weeks.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> New issue (1):
>>>>>>>>> 1. disk error when guest boot up via qcow2 image
>>>>>>>>> https://bugs.launchpad.net/qemu/+bug/1002121
>>>>>>>>> -- Should be a regression on qemu-kvm.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Kevin, is this the known regression in qcow2 or something new?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If the commit ID is right, it must be something new. The regression
>>> that
>>>>>>> Marcelo found was fixed in 54e68143.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, it's right. This should be a new regression.
>>>>>> I looked at the comment of 54e68143, and found it was not related
>>> the
>>>>> issue I reported.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The Launchpad bug refers to commit e54f008ef, which doesn't
>>> include
>>>>> this
>>>>>>> fix indeed. So was the test repeated with a more current qemu-kvm
>>>>>>> version after filing the bug in Launchpad, or is the commit ID in this
>>>>>>> mail wrong?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Latest commit 3fd9fedb in qemu-kvm master tree still has this issue.
>>>>>> And, the commit ID provided in Launchpad is correct.
>>>>>
>>>>> Can you please check if the bug exists in upstream qemu.git as well?
>>>>>
>>>> This bug doesn't exist on upstream qemu.git with latest commit:
>>> fd4567d9.
>>>> So, it should only exists on qemu-kvm tree.
>>>
>>> Please bisect manually (not using git bisect), with the attached list of
>>> commits. These are the qemu -> qemu-kvm merge commits in the range
>>> described as bad/good.
>>>
>> The 1st bad commit in your attached list is abc551bd
>> More detailed info:
>> 171d2f2249a360d7d623130d3aa991418c53716d good
>> fd453a24166e36a3d376c9bc221e520e3ee425af good
>> abc551bd456cf0407fa798395d83dc5aa35f6dbb bad
>> 823ccf41509baa197dd6a3bef63837a6cf101ad8 bad
>
> Thanks, this points to the qcow2 v3 changes. Let's try to find the exact
> culprit. I have rebased the qcow2 patches on top of that good merge
> (fd453a24). Please apply the attached mbox on top of this merge:
>
> git checkout fd453a24
> git am qcow2v3.mbox
>
> You can then start a git bisect between your new HEAD and fd453a24.

Another thing you could try is if reverting e82dabd and bef0fd59 fixes
the problem for you.

Kevin