qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/2] ide: fix crash in IDE cdrom read


From: John Snow
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/2] ide: fix crash in IDE cdrom read
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2017 12:49:55 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.4.0


On 12/14/2017 06:29 AM, Denis V. Lunev wrote:
>> If this has been broken since 2.9, 2.11-rc3 is too late for a bandaid
>> applied to something I can't diagnose. Let's discuss this for 2.12 and I
>> will keep trying to figure out what the root cause is.
> I have read the entire letter in 2 subsequent attempts, but
> unfortunately I can not say much more additionally :(
> 

No problem, sometimes I don't understand myself. And the IDE code isn't
exactly the nicest stuff to read. If I was smart enough I'd refactor the
whole thing, but without breaking migration it's a little hard :(

>> Some questions for you:
>>
>> (1) Is the guest Linux? Do we know why this one machine might be
>> tripping up QEMU? (Is it running a fuzzer, a weird OS, etc...?)
> This is running by the end-user by our customer and we do not have
> access to that machine and customer. This is anonymized crash report
> from the node. This is not a single crash. We observe 1-2 reports with
> this crash in a day.
> 

Yikes. Is this still on a 2.9-based VM, or have you upgraded to 2.10 or
2.11 at this point?

(From memory this was a problem with a 2.9 based machine)

>> (2) Does the VM actually have a CDROM inserted at some point? Is it
>> possible we're racing on some kind of eject or graph manipulation failure?
> unclear but IMHO probable.
> 

If they're using a 2.10+ based VM, could you look at some trace points?

either:
trace_ide_atapi_cmd (just scsi byte 0), or
trace_ide_atapi_cmd_packet (the entire scsi cdb)

and

trace_ide_exec_cmd

the actual command bytes never get saved in the state struct, so it's
hard to tell from traces what commands were being processed, but these
traces help.

>> (3) Is this using AHCI or IDE?
> IDE. This is known 120%. We do not provide ability to enable AHCI
> without manual tweaking.
> 

At least that helps narrow down the path...

>> If I can't figure it out within a week or so from here I'll just check
>> in the band-aid with some /* FIXME */ comments attached.
> No prob. We are going to ship my band-aid and see to report statistics.
> 
> Thank you in advance,
>     Den

I'll stage the band-aid with some FIXME comments, and maybe some scary
error_report prints with some information in them. I'll send it to the list.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]