From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Iq3dQ-0005oy-7T for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 08 Nov 2007 04:25:12 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Iq3dO-0005og-Q0 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 08 Nov 2007 04:25:10 -0500 Received: from mx1.polytechnique.org ([129.104.30.34]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Iq3dO-0001FQ-Al for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 08 Nov 2007 04:25:10 -0500 Received: from fbe1.dev.netgem.com (gw.netgem.com [195.68.2.34]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ssl.polytechnique.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26D0633176 for ; Thu, 8 Nov 2007 10:25:08 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <4732D5F3.2070709@bellard.org> Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2007 10:25:07 +0100 From: Fabrice Bellard MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [kvm-devel] FreeBSD image hangs during boot References: <47022E7E.3030509@aurel32.net> <470234DF.6030802@qumranet.com> <470237DC.5060008@aurel32.net> <47027161.50004@qumranet.com> <47027586.9020508@aurel32.net> <47027A01.5080903@aurel32.net> <47027F25.80001@aurel32.net> <470CB4DE.20707@qumranet.com> <470CD1F1.20305@aurel32.net> <470CD22C.5050003@qumranet.com> <470CD7DF.2020906@aurel32.net> <4732AF9B.9010201@qumranet.com> In-Reply-To: <4732AF9B.9010201@qumranet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Avi Kivity wrote: > Aurelien Jarno wrote: >> Well the IDE code hasn't changed a lot recently, so I checked the CVS >> history and easily (first test) found the commit that causes the problem: >> >> Last AIO patch, by Vladimir N. Oleynik. >> >> http://cvs.savannah.nongnu.org/viewvc/qemu/hw/ide.c?root=qemu&r1=1.64&r2=1.65 >> >> > > Have we learned something about this issue? Should I revert the patch > from kvm? Should qemu? Sure. The conversion from sync to async mode done in this patch is incomplete to say the least. Fabrice.