From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MbWAV-00033A-4b for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 13 Aug 2009 05:00:19 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MbWAP-00032y-Es for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 13 Aug 2009 05:00:18 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=45125 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MbWAP-00032v-8s for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 13 Aug 2009 05:00:13 -0400 Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:33745) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MbWAO-00054c-Lo for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 13 Aug 2009 05:00:12 -0400 Message-ID: <4A83D613.5070408@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 12:00:03 +0300 From: Avi Kivity MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] virtio-blk/qdev failure in the current git tree References: <20090810235646.GA12872@lst.de> <4A80BB6B.3020001@codemonkey.ws> <20090811161302.GA2053@lst.de> <20090811163638.GA4891@lst.de> <4A81C669.8070300@redhat.com> <4A828ABF.1040306@redhat.com> <4A8292DB.9000609@redhat.com> <20090812215032.GA28376@lst.de> <4A833B9C.6000803@codemonkey.ws> In-Reply-To: <4A833B9C.6000803@codemonkey.ws> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Anthony Liguori Cc: Gerd Hoffmann , Christoph Hellwig , qemu-devel@nongnu.org On 08/13/2009 01:01 AM, Anthony Liguori wrote: > Christoph Hellwig wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 01:00:59PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: >>>> Looks like a irq routing issue ... >>> What about qemu-kvm.git (and its bios)? There was a lot of irq >>> routing work there, maybe not all of it made it into qemu.git. >> >> Yeah, qemu-kvm works just fine. The amount of irq routing trouble I see >> with virtio and upstream qemu is getting really annoying :P > > Where were the irq routing trouble fixes in qemu-kvm? Was it fixes in > the BIOS? > I think so, but not 100% sure. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function