From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:51468)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1S2Sbb-0001rC-Ut
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 28 Feb 2012 14:21:01 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1S2SbW-0001w0-DY
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 28 Feb 2012 14:20:59 -0500
Received: from mail-pz0-f45.google.com ([209.85.210.45]:39038)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1S2SbW-0001vl-6X
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 28 Feb 2012 14:20:54 -0500
Received: by dadp14 with SMTP id p14so8136694dad.4
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Tue, 28 Feb 2012 11:20:52 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <4F4D290F.90907@codemonkey.ws>
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2012 13:20:47 -0600
From: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <4F4CC7C6.9070609@redhat.com> <20120228175914.GA28479@redhat.com>
	<4F4D1951.4040807@codemonkey.ws> <4F4D19C5.8030507@redhat.com>
	<4F4D2789.2070306@codemonkey.ws> <4F4D2848.30007@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <4F4D2848.30007@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PULL] Memory core space reduction
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Cc: qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>

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