From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:53381) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QwI3k-0001uM-Vk for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 24 Aug 2011 14:20:18 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QwI3j-0000sw-Du for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 24 Aug 2011 14:20:16 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:28974) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QwI3j-0000ss-6H for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 24 Aug 2011 14:20:15 -0400 Message-ID: <4E5540DA.90704@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 21:20:10 +0300 From: Avi Kivity MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <4E54C730.1010602@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] PPC* and Sparc32 crash List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Blue Swirl Cc: qemu-devel On 08/24/2011 08:48 PM, Blue Swirl wrote: > On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 9:41 AM, Avi Kivity wrote: > > On 08/23/2011 08:55 PM, Blue Swirl wrote: > >> > >> qemu-system-ppc: /src/qemu/memory.c:1183: > >> memory_region_add_subregion_common: Assertion `!subregion->parent' > >> failed. > >> Aborted > >> qemu-system-ppc64: /src/qemu/memory.c:1183: > >> memory_region_add_subregion_common: Assertion `!subregion->parent' > >> failed. > >> Aborted > >> qemu-system-sparc: /src/qemu/hw/sysbus.c:156: > >> sysbus_register_withprop: Assertion `info->qdev.size>= > >> sizeof(SysBusDevice)' failed. > >> Aborted > >> > >> This is with b861b7419c49ad53e786062b4fbf6da53468f130. Other targets > >> seem to work. > > > > Please provide disk images and command line options, and I will investigate. > > Most legitimate command lines even without any images will do: > $ ./obj-amd64/ppc-softmmu/qemu-system-ppc > qemu-system-ppc: /src/qemu/memory.c:1183: > memory_region_add_subregion_common: Assertion `!subregion->parent' > failed. > Aborted > Here the issue is that escc is both a sysbus device at 0x80013000 and a a PCI device. Is this really correct? In any case, I will post a patch making it behave like it did before the conversion, and leave any extra fixes to someone who knows the device. -- I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this signature is too narrow to contain.