[Qemu-devel] [RFC] Bug Day - June 1st, 2010

[Qemu-devel] [RFC] Bug Day - June 1st, 2010

[Anthony Liguori]

Hi,

In an effort to improve the 0.13 release quality, I'd like to host a Bug 
Day on June 1st, 2010.  I've setup a quick wiki page with some more info 
(http://wiki.qemu.org/BugDay/June2010).

Here's my basic thinking:

  - Anyone who can should try to spend some time either triaging bugs, 
updating bug status, or actually fixing bugs.
  - We'll have a special IRC channel (#qemu-bugday) on OFTC.  As many 
QEMU and KVM developers as possible should join this channel for that 
day to help assist people working on bugs.
  - We'll try to migrate as many confirmable bugs from the Source Forge 
tracker to Launchpad.

If this is successful, we'll try to have regular bug days.  Any 
suggestions on how to make the experience as fun and productive as 
possible are certainly appreciated!

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Bug Day - June 1st, 2010

[Natalia Portillo]

Hi,

> - We'll try to migrate as many confirmable bugs from the Source Forge tracker to Launchpad.
I think that part of the bug day should also include retesting OSes that appear in OS Support List as having bug and confirming if the bug is still present and if it's in Launchpad or not.

Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Bug Day - June 1st, 2010

[Jamie Lokier]

Natalia Portillo wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> > - We'll try to migrate as many confirmable bugs from the Source Forge tracker to Launchpad.
> I think that part of the bug day should also include retesting OSes that appear in OS Support List as having bug and confirming if the bug is still present and if it's in Launchpad or not.

There have been reports of several legacy OSes being unable to install
or boot in the newer qemu while working in the older one.  They're
probably not in the "OS Support List" though.  Are they effectively
uninteresting for the purpose of the 0.13 release?

Unfortunately I doubt I will have time to participate in the Bug Day.

Thanks,
-- Jamie

Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Bug Day - June 1st, 2010

[Natalia Portillo]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 972 bytes --]


El 19/05/2010, a las 02:45, Jamie Lokier escribió:

> Natalia Portillo wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>>> - We'll try to migrate as many confirmable bugs from the Source Forge tracker to Launchpad.
>> I think that part of the bug day should also include retesting OSes that appear in OS Support List as having bug and confirming if the bug is still present and if it's in Launchpad or not.
> 
> There have been reports of several legacy OSes being unable to install
> or boot in the newer qemu while working in the older one.  They're
> probably not in the "OS Support List" though.  Are they effectively
> uninteresting for the purpose of the 0.13 release?
There are a couple of.

The majority of them are because SeaBIOS not behaving like real hardware should and must do.

If you know any OS that's not in the OS Support List and is broken please commit.

> Unfortunately I doubt I will have time to participate in the Bug Day.
> 
> Thanks,
> -- Jamie
> 


[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1617 bytes --]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Bug Day - June 1st, 2010

[Aurelien Jarno]

On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 05:38:27PM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> In an effort to improve the 0.13 release quality, I'd like to host a
> Bug Day on June 1st, 2010.  I've setup a quick wiki page with some
> more info (http://wiki.qemu.org/BugDay/June2010).
> 
> Here's my basic thinking:
> 
>  - Anyone who can should try to spend some time either triaging
> bugs, updating bug status, or actually fixing bugs.
>  - We'll have a special IRC channel (#qemu-bugday) on OFTC.  As many
> QEMU and KVM developers as possible should join this channel for
> that day to help assist people working on bugs.
>  - We'll try to migrate as many confirmable bugs from the Source
> Forge tracker to Launchpad.
> 
> If this is successful, we'll try to have regular bug days.  Any
> suggestions on how to make the experience as fun and productive as
> possible are certainly appreciated!

The idea is nice, but would it be possible to hold this on a week-end,
I personally won't be able to attend such thing on a day week.

Or maybe holding that on two days: friday and saturday so that people
can participate at least one of the two days, depending if they do that
from work or from home.

-- 
Aurelien Jarno                          GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73
aurelien@aurel32.net                 http://www.aurel32.net

Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Bug Day - June 1st, 2010

[Miguel Di Ciurcio Filho]

On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 2:04 AM, Aurelien Jarno <aurelien@aurel32.net> wrote:
>
> The idea is nice, but would it be possible to hold this on a week-end,
> I personally won't be able to attend such thing on a day week.
>
> Or maybe holding that on two days: friday and saturday so that people
> can participate at least one of the two days, depending if they do that
> from work or from home.
>

I second that. How about June 4th and 5th?

Miguel

Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Bug Day - June 1st, 2010

[Anthony Liguori]

On 05/18/2010 08:45 PM, Jamie Lokier wrote:
> Natalia Portillo wrote:
>    
>> Hi,
>>
>>      
>>> - We'll try to migrate as many confirmable bugs from the Source Forge tracker to Launchpad.
>>>        
>> I think that part of the bug day should also include retesting OSes that appear in OS Support List as having bug and confirming if the bug is still present and if it's in Launchpad or not.

We don't have a supported OS list.  Everything is best effort.  The OS 
Support List Natalia is referring to is a reflection of what's been 
reported to work, not what we expect should work.

>> There have been reports of several legacy OSes being unable to install
>> or boot in the newer qemu while working in the older one.  They're
>> probably not in the "OS Support List" though.  Are they effectively
>> uninteresting for the purpose of the 0.13 release?
>>      

For the Bug Day, anything is interesting IMHO.  My main interest is to 
get as many people involved in testing and bug fixing as possible.  If 
folks are interested in testing specific things like unusual or older 
OSes, I'm happy to see it!

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

>> Unfortunately I doubt I will have time to participate in the Bug Day.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> -- Jamie
>>
>>      

Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Bug Day - June 1st, 2010

[Michael Tokarev]

Anthony Liguori wrote:
[]
> For the Bug Day, anything is interesting IMHO.  My main interest is to
> get as many people involved in testing and bug fixing as possible.  If
> folks are interested in testing specific things like unusual or older
> OSes, I'm happy to see it!

Well, interesting or not, but I for one don't know what to do with the
results.  There were a thread on kvm@ about sigsegv in cirrus code when
running winNT. The issue has been identified and appears to be fixed,
as in, kvm process does not SIGSEGV anymore, but it does not work anyway,
now printing:

 BUG: kvm_dirty_pages_log_enable_slot: invalid parameters

with garbled guest display.  Thanks goes to Stefano Stabellini for
finding the SIGSEGV case, but unfortunately his hard work isn't quite
useful since the behavour isn't very much different from the previous
version... ;)

Also, thanks to Andre Przywara, whole winNT thing works but it requires
-cpu qemu64,level=1 (or level=2 or =3), -- _not_ with default CPU.  This
is also testing, but it's not obvious what to do witht the result...

Thanks!

/mjt

Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Bug Day - June 1st, 2010

[Anthony Liguori]

On 05/19/2010 08:19 AM, Michael Tokarev wrote:
> Anthony Liguori wrote:
> []
>    
>> For the Bug Day, anything is interesting IMHO.  My main interest is to
>> get as many people involved in testing and bug fixing as possible.  If
>> folks are interested in testing specific things like unusual or older
>> OSes, I'm happy to see it!
>>      
> Well, interesting or not, but I for one don't know what to do with the
> results.  There were a thread on kvm@ about sigsegv in cirrus code when
> running winNT. The issue has been identified and appears to be fixed,
> as in, kvm process does not SIGSEGV anymore, but it does not work anyway,
> now printing:
>
>   BUG: kvm_dirty_pages_log_enable_slot: invalid parameters
>
> with garbled guest display.  Thanks goes to Stefano Stabellini for
> finding the SIGSEGV case, but unfortunately his hard work isn't quite
> useful since the behavour isn't very much different from the previous
> version... ;)
>    

File a bug in Launchpad.  Even if it isn't fixed immediately, at least 
that way it will not be lost.  Things are too easily lost on the mailing 
list.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

> Also, thanks to Andre Przywara, whole winNT thing works but it requires
> -cpu qemu64,level=1 (or level=2 or =3), -- _not_ with default CPU.  This
> is also testing, but it's not obvious what to do witht the result...
>
> Thanks!
>
> /mjt
>
>    

Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Bug Day - June 1st, 2010

[Anthony Liguori]

On 05/19/2010 12:04 AM, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 05:38:27PM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>    
>> Hi,
>>
>> In an effort to improve the 0.13 release quality, I'd like to host a
>> Bug Day on June 1st, 2010.  I've setup a quick wiki page with some
>> more info (http://wiki.qemu.org/BugDay/June2010).
>>
>> Here's my basic thinking:
>>
>>   - Anyone who can should try to spend some time either triaging
>> bugs, updating bug status, or actually fixing bugs.
>>   - We'll have a special IRC channel (#qemu-bugday) on OFTC.  As many
>> QEMU and KVM developers as possible should join this channel for
>> that day to help assist people working on bugs.
>>   - We'll try to migrate as many confirmable bugs from the Source
>> Forge tracker to Launchpad.
>>
>> If this is successful, we'll try to have regular bug days.  Any
>> suggestions on how to make the experience as fun and productive as
>> possible are certainly appreciated!
>>      
> The idea is nice, but would it be possible to hold this on a week-end,
> I personally won't be able to attend such thing on a day week.
>
> Or maybe holding that on two days: friday and saturday so that people
> can participate at least one of the two days, depending if they do that
> from work or from home.
>    

The work week in Israel is Sunday - Thursday.

It would have to be Sunday and Monday but honestly, I think both days 
tend to be bad for this sort of thing.

I'd much rather do more frequent bug days and alternate between a 
weekday and a Saturday.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Bug Day - June 1st, 2010

[Anthony Liguori]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1239 bytes --]

On 05/18/2010 08:48 PM, Natalia Portillo wrote:
>
> El 19/05/2010, a las 02:45, Jamie Lokier escribió:
>
>> Natalia Portillo wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>> - We'll try to migrate as many confirmable bugs from the Source 
>>>> Forge tracker to Launchpad.
>>> I think that part of the bug day should also include retesting OSes 
>>> that appear in OS Support List as having bug and confirming if the 
>>> bug is still present and if it's in Launchpad or not.
>>
>> There have been reports of several legacy OSes being unable to install
>> or boot in the newer qemu while working in the older one.  They're
>> probably not in the "OS Support List" though.  Are they effectively
>> uninteresting for the purpose of the 0.13 release?
> There are a couple of.
>
> The majority of them are because SeaBIOS not behaving like real 
> hardware should and must do.
>
> If you know any OS that's not in the OS Support List and is broken 
> please commit.

If something is broken, please file a bug against it.  The OS Support 
List is a very useful resource but we still need bugs to actually work 
on fixing the problems.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

>
>> Unfortunately I doubt I will have time to participate in the Bug Day.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> -- Jamie
>>
>


[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2348 bytes --]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Bug Day - June 1st, 2010

[Natalia Portillo]

Hi,

>>> There have been reports of several legacy OSes being unable to install
>>> or boot in the newer qemu while working in the older one.  They're
>>> probably not in the "OS Support List" though.  Are they effectively
>>> uninteresting for the purpose of the 0.13 release?
>>>     
> 
> For the Bug Day, anything is interesting IMHO.  My main interest is to get as many people involved in testing and bug fixing as possible.  If folks are interested in testing specific things like unusual or older OSes, I'm happy to see it!

Well the idea is not only about unusual or older OSes.
That list detected bugs and regressions appearing in usual and new OSes (for example the infamous SeaBIOS problem with Windows 9x and mouse also affects freshly and new OpenSuSE Linux 11.2).

Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Bug Day - June 1st, 2010

[Natalia Portillo]

Hi,

>> There are a couple of.
>> 
>> The majority of them are because SeaBIOS not behaving like real hardware should and must do.
>> 
>> If you know any OS that's not in the OS Support List and is broken please commit.
> 
> If something is broken, please file a bug against it.  The OS Support List is a very useful resource but we still need bugs to actually work on fixing the problems.
The OS Support List clearly specifies that in case of a fail, bug, or non working case, a bug should be filled, so I think, using the OS Support List includes bugs in Launchpad, however the reverse is not true.

[Qemu-devel] [RFC] Bug Day - June 1st, 2010

[Riccardo Magliocchetti]

Hello,

i have quite a few free time in these days so i've anticipated the bug 
day and started looking for some low hanging fruit. I've found a couple 
of sf.net bugs that are obsoleted / fixed:

- Compilation fails when configure with -DDEBUG #1945129 : code has been 
updated and the issue is not valid anymore, compiles fine with -DDEBUG

- KVM doesn't compiles due to bug in "configure" script #1830975 : fixed 
in ac62922e7295acd0cdc2824472ae91c31917359b

thanks,
riccardo

Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Bug Day - June 1st, 2010

[Luiz Capitulino]

On Tue, 18 May 2010 17:38:27 -0500
Anthony Liguori <aliguori@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> In an effort to improve the 0.13 release quality, I'd like to host a Bug 
> Day on June 1st, 2010.  I've setup a quick wiki page with some more info 
> (http://wiki.qemu.org/BugDay/June2010).

 Tuesday is our call conf day and other people have reported that they have
more confs during that day. Suggest Jun 2.

> Here's my basic thinking:
> 
>   - Anyone who can should try to spend some time either triaging bugs, 
> updating bug status, or actually fixing bugs.

 And testing, Fedora has a number of test cases already written, but
I guess that just a few are qemu specific:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2010-04-08_Virtualization

 We could link those and write our own, or at least list the major
features to be tested..

 Of course we could have a different day for testing too, but I think
this is a way to get everyone busy.

>   - We'll have a special IRC channel (#qemu-bugday) on OFTC.  As many 
> QEMU and KVM developers as possible should join this channel for that 
> day to help assist people working on bugs.
>   - We'll try to migrate as many confirmable bugs from the Source Forge 
> tracker to Launchpad.

 Can't this be automated?

> If this is successful, we'll try to have regular bug days.  Any 
> suggestions on how to make the experience as fun and productive as 
> possible are certainly appreciated!

 Lots of foods and a Monty Python session in the evening.

Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Bug Day - June 1st, 2010

[Jamie Lokier]

Michael Tokarev wrote:
> Anthony Liguori wrote:
> []
> > For the Bug Day, anything is interesting IMHO.  My main interest is to
> > get as many people involved in testing and bug fixing as possible.  If
> > folks are interested in testing specific things like unusual or older
> > OSes, I'm happy to see it!
> 
> Well, interesting or not, but I for one don't know what to do with the
> results.  There were a thread on kvm@ about sigsegv in cirrus code when
> running winNT. The issue has been identified and appears to be fixed,
> as in, kvm process does not SIGSEGV anymore, but it does not work anyway,
> now printing:
> 
>  BUG: kvm_dirty_pages_log_enable_slot: invalid parameters
> 
> with garbled guest display.  Thanks goes to Stefano Stabellini for
> finding the SIGSEGV case, but unfortunately his hard work isn't quite
> useful since the behavour isn't very much different from the previous
> version... ;)

A "BUG:" is good to see in a bug report: It gives you something
specific to analyse.  Good luck ;-)

Imho, it'd be quite handy to keep a timeline of working/non-working
guests in a table somewhere, and which qemu versions and options they
were observed to work or break with.

> Also, thanks to Andre Przywara, whole winNT thing works but it requires
> -cpu qemu64,level=1 (or level=2 or =3), -- _not_ with default CPU.  This
> is also testing, but it's not obvious what to do witht the result...

Doesn't WinNT work with qemu32 or kvm32?
It's a 32-bit OS after all.

- Jamie

Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Bug Day - June 1st, 2010

[Anthony Liguori]

On 05/19/2010 09:52 AM, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
> On Tue, 18 May 2010 17:38:27 -0500
> Anthony Liguori<aliguori@linux.vnet.ibm.com>  wrote:
>
>    
>> Hi,
>>
>> In an effort to improve the 0.13 release quality, I'd like to host a Bug
>> Day on June 1st, 2010.  I've setup a quick wiki page with some more info
>> (http://wiki.qemu.org/BugDay/June2010).
>>      
>   Tuesday is our call conf day and other people have reported that they have
> more confs during that day. Suggest Jun 2.
>    

I don't have a problem with the 2nd.

>> Here's my basic thinking:
>>
>>    - Anyone who can should try to spend some time either triaging bugs,
>> updating bug status, or actually fixing bugs.
>>      
>   And testing, Fedora has a number of test cases already written, but
> I guess that just a few are qemu specific:
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2010-04-08_Virtualization
>
>   We could link those and write our own, or at least list the major
> features to be tested..
>
>   Of course we could have a different day for testing too, but I think
> this is a way to get everyone busy.
>    

Yup, I think it's a good suggestion.  Please update the wiki if there's 
anything you'd like to add.

>>    - We'll have a special IRC channel (#qemu-bugday) on OFTC.  As many
>> QEMU and KVM developers as possible should join this channel for that
>> day to help assist people working on bugs.
>>    - We'll try to migrate as many confirmable bugs from the Source Forge
>> tracker to Launchpad.
>>      
>   Can't this be automated?
>    

It could, but I think doing it manually could be helpful in culling bad 
bug reports.

>> If this is successful, we'll try to have regular bug days.  Any
>> suggestions on how to make the experience as fun and productive as
>> possible are certainly appreciated!
>>      
>   Lots of foods and a Monty Python session in the evening.
>    

Of course :-)

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Bug Day - June 1st, 2010

[Andre Przywara]

Michael Tokarev wrote:
> ...
> 
> Also, thanks to Andre Przywara, whole winNT thing works but it requires
> -cpu qemu64,level=1 (or level=2 or =3), -- _not_ with default CPU.  This
> is also testing, but it's not obvious what to do witht the result...
Can't we use the file based CPU models for that? Actually it looks like 
a template config file for certain guest operation systems (like -vga 
std -net nic,model=ne2k_pci for older Windows version) make sense. These 
could include all quirks that we find on the way.

BTW: Does anyone knows what the problem with Windows95/98 on KVM is? I 
tried some tracing today, but couldn't find a hint.

Regards,
Andre.

-- 
Andre Przywara
AMD-Operating System Research Center (OSRC), Dresden, Germany
Tel: +49 351 488-3567-12

Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Bug Day - June 1st, 2010

[Anthony Liguori]

On 05/19/2010 05:29 PM, Andre Przywara wrote:
> Michael Tokarev wrote:
>> ...
>>
>> Also, thanks to Andre Przywara, whole winNT thing works but it requires
>> -cpu qemu64,level=1 (or level=2 or =3), -- _not_ with default CPU.  This
>> is also testing, but it's not obvious what to do witht the result...
> Can't we use the file based CPU models for that? Actually it looks 
> like a template config file for certain guest operation systems (like 
> -vga std -net nic,model=ne2k_pci for older Windows version) make 
> sense. These could include all quirks that we find on the way.

It'd be nice if we had more flexibility in defining custom machine types 
so you could just do qemu -M win98.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

> BTW: Does anyone knows what the problem with Windows95/98 on KVM is? I 
> tried some tracing today, but couldn't find a hint.
>
> Regards,
> Andre.
>

Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Bug Day - June 1st, 2010

[Michael Tokarev]

20.05.2010 02:30, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 05/19/2010 05:29 PM, Andre Przywara wrote:
>> Michael Tokarev wrote:
>>> ...
>>>
>>> Also, thanks to Andre Przywara, whole winNT thing works but it requires
>>> -cpu qemu64,level=1 (or level=2 or =3), -- _not_ with default CPU. This
[]
> It'd be nice if we had more flexibility in defining custom machine types
> so you could just do qemu -M win98.

This is wrong IMHO.  win98 and winNT can run on various different
machines, including all modern ones (yes I tried the same winNT
on my Athlon X2-64, just had to switch SATA from AHCI to IDE;
win95 works too)...  just not in kvm :)

>> BTW: Does anyone knows what the problem with Windows95/98 on KVM is? I
>> tried some tracing today, but couldn't find a hint.

Um.  The bugreport(s) come as a surprize for me: I tried to
install win98 in kvm several times in the past but setup
always failed - different messages in different versions
of kvm, either "unable to emulate" or "real mode trap" or
something else, or just lockup, usually on first reboot.
So - the bugreports talks about mouse non-working, but
this means win98 itself works somehow...  I dunno :)

/mjt

Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Bug Day - June 1st, 2010

[Andre Przywara]

Michael Tokarev wrote:
> 20.05.2010 02:30, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>> On 05/19/2010 05:29 PM, Andre Przywara wrote:
>>> Michael Tokarev wrote:
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>> Also, thanks to Andre Przywara, whole winNT thing works but it requires
>>>> -cpu qemu64,level=1 (or level=2 or =3), -- _not_ with default CPU. This
> []
>> It'd be nice if we had more flexibility in defining custom machine types
>> so you could just do qemu -M win98.
> 
> This is wrong IMHO.  win98 and winNT can run on various different
> machines, including all modern ones (yes I tried the same winNT
> on my Athlon X2-64, just had to switch SATA from AHCI to IDE;
> win95 works too)...  just not in kvm :)
Well, not really. You were lucky with your Athlon X2-64, actually it is 
the last machine not triggering the bug. I tried it on a AthlonII-X4 
(which has maxleaf=5 as any newer AMD machines) and it showed the same 
bug. On Intel boxes this bug should trigger on every CPU starting with 
some Pentium4 models, including all Core chips.
Have you tried versions with a newer service pack (SP6)?

>>> BTW: Does anyone knows what the problem with Windows95/98 on KVM is? I
>>> tried some tracing today, but couldn't find a hint.
> 
> Um.  The bugreport(s) come as a surprize for me: I tried to
> install win98 in kvm several times in the past but setup
> always failed - different messages in different versions
> of kvm, either "unable to emulate" or "real mode trap" or
> something else, or just lockup, usually on first reboot.
> So - the bugreports talks about mouse non-working, but
> this means win98 itself works somehow...  I dunno :)
I think these bug reports are about plain QEMU. I tried it yesterday, in 
fact the mouse is non-functional. In KVM Windows95 gives me a black 
screen after the welcome screen with the moving bottom row. There are 
just two lines at the top: (translated from the german version)
While initializing device NTKERN:
Windows protection fault. Restart the computer.

KVM catched some #UDs due to ARPL from VM86 mode, but TCG got them too 
and it survived. So if anyone has some more hints, I'd be grateful.

Regards,
Andre.

-- 
Andre Przywara
AMD-Operating System Research Center (OSRC), Dresden, Germany
Tel: +49 351 448-3567-12

Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Bug Day - June 1st, 2010

[Jes Sorensen]

On 05/19/10 02:58, Natalia Portillo wrote:
> Hi,
> 
>> - We'll try to migrate as many confirmable bugs from the Source Forge tracker to Launchpad.
> I think that part of the bug day should also include retesting OSes that appear in OS Support List as having bug and confirming if the bug is still present and if it's in Launchpad or not.

This would be a great task for people who would like to contribute, but
maybe don't feel they have the experience or knowledge to hack on the
code itself.

Jes

Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Bug Day - June 1st, 2010

[Jes Sorensen]

On 05/19/10 15:34, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 05/19/2010 12:04 AM, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
>> The idea is nice, but would it be possible to hold this on a week-end,
>> I personally won't be able to attend such thing on a day week.
>>
>> Or maybe holding that on two days: friday and saturday so that people
>> can participate at least one of the two days, depending if they do that
>> from work or from home.
> 
> The work week in Israel is Sunday - Thursday.
> 
> It would have to be Sunday and Monday but honestly, I think both days
> tend to be bad for this sort of thing.
> 
> I'd much rather do more frequent bug days and alternate between a
> weekday and a Saturday.

If we settle for the 2nd of June, maybe the people who are unavailable
on week days, could run a pre-bug day on Sunday the 30th. Maybe some of
us would be able to stop by the channel briefly on the Sunday even if we
plan to do the big bug day on the 2nd?

Cheers,
Jes

Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Bug Day - June 1st, 2010

[Michael Tokarev]

20.05.2010 11:15, Andre Przywara wrote:
> Michael Tokarev wrote:
>> []
>>> It'd be nice if we had more flexibility in defining custom machine types
>>> so you could just do qemu -M win98.
>>
>> This is wrong IMHO. win98 and winNT can run on various different
>> machines, including all modern ones (yes I tried the same winNT
>> on my Athlon X2-64, just had to switch SATA from AHCI to IDE;
>> win95 works too)... just not in kvm :)

> Well, not really. You were lucky with your Athlon X2-64, actually it is
> the last machine not triggering the bug. I tried it on a AthlonII-X4
> (which has maxleaf=5 as any newer AMD machines) and it showed the same
> bug. On Intel boxes this bug should trigger on every CPU starting with
> some Pentium4 models, including all Core chips.
> Have you tried versions with a newer service pack (SP6)?

I replied in the original discussion -- after upgrading to SP6
there's no need in ,level=1 anymore, any -cpu variant works
without crashes.  The problem is to set it up, at least for
me, since I don't have sp6 integrated into setup.  Well, I
don't use winNT to start with, actually, so for me it's not
a problem at all ;) -- the reason why I asked is because I
have a debian bugreport about this very issue, see
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=575439
(and because I had winNT install handy)

But this is really interesting information - that winNT
fails on other CPUs too.  Thank you for that, now I can
close the debian bugreport ;)

>>>> BTW: Does anyone knows what the problem with Windows95/98 on KVM is? I
>>>> tried some tracing today, but couldn't find a hint.
>>
>> Um. The bugreport(s) come as a surprize for me: I tried to
>> install win98 in kvm several times in the past but setup
>> always failed - different messages in different versions
>> of kvm, either "unable to emulate" or "real mode trap" or
>> something else, or just lockup, usually on first reboot.
>> So - the bugreports talks about mouse non-working, but
>> this means win98 itself works somehow... I dunno :)

> I think these bug reports are about plain QEMU. I tried it yesterday, in
> fact the mouse is non-functional. In KVM Windows95 gives me a black
> screen after the welcome screen with the moving bottom row. There are
> just two lines at the top: (translated from the german version)
> While initializing device NTKERN:
> Windows protection fault. Restart the computer.

Yeah, that's what i've seen too, it's exactly
ow it fails here with modern kvm.

> KVM catched some #UDs due to ARPL from VM86 mode, but TCG got them too
> and it survived. So if anyone has some more hints, I'd be grateful.


Thank you!

/mjt