Re: [Qemu-devel] [PULL] Memory core space reduction

[Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>]

On 02/28/2012 01:17 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 02/28/2012 09:14 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>> On 02/28/2012 12:15 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
>>> On 02/28/2012 08:13 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>>>>
>>>> FWIW, I'm processing this PULL request right now and I'm seeing a SEGV
>>>> too.  The backtrace is a malloc failure in QOM.
>>>>
>>>
>>> How do we reproduce this?
>>
>> I don't trust this bisect completely, but here are the results:
>>
>>
>>   5f0e841a5c8c0bc0663e5582432eb788a3e0f9e3 is the first bad commit
>> commit 5f0e841a5c8c0bc0663e5582432eb788a3e0f9e3
>> Author: Avi Kivity<avi@redhat.com>
>> Date:   Sun Jan 8 19:46:17 2012 +0200
>>
>>      ioport: change portio_list not to use memory_region_set_offset()
>>
>>      memory_region_set_offset() will be going away soon, so don't use it.
>>      Use an alias instead.
>>
>>      Signed-off-by: Avi Kivity<avi@redhat.com>
>>      Reviewed-by: Richard Henderson<rth@twiddle.net>
>>
>> :100644 100644 36fa3a477ebde72de4745bf4e13ad5146f4686fd
>> 505b252491d1d4e618a5059d75f3cb560a24c61f M    ioport.c
>> :100644 100644 ae3e9da0b5487e68a16f28c459889496160e8e16
>> ab29c89fb3ac6bbe72b2b622172cb9ef7c462e62 M    ioport.h
>> bisect run success
>
> That's the very first commit.  You'd get this result if either this was
> the bad commit, of if the input to 'git bisect good' was also bad.  Can
> you double-check this?

Looks like it was a bad bisect :-(  I thought I had a 100% reproducible test 
case but it turned out not to be.

Regards,

Anthony Liguroi