On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 07:40:29AM +0000, Ren, Yongjie wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Kevin Wolf [mailto:kw...@redhat.com] > > Sent: Monday, May 21, 2012 11:30 PM > > To: Ren, Yongjie > > Cc: Avi Kivity; kvm@vger.kernel.org; Liu, RongrongX > > Subject: Re: Biweekly KVM Test report, kernel 51bfd299... qemu > > a1fce560... > > > > Am 21.05.2012 11:45, schrieb Ren, Yongjie: > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> From: Kevin Wolf [mailto:kw...@redhat.com] > > >> Sent: Monday, May 21, 2012 5:05 PM > > >> To: Avi Kivity > > >> Cc: Ren, Yongjie; kvm@vger.kernel.org > > >> Subject: Re: Biweekly KVM Test report, kernel 51bfd299... qemu > > >> a1fce560... > > >> > > >> Am 21.05.2012 10:27, schrieb Avi Kivity: > > >>> On 05/21/2012 06:34 AM, Ren, Yongjie wrote: > > >>>> Hi All, > > >>>> > > >>>> This is KVM upstream test result against kvm.git > > >> 51bfd2998113e1f8ce8dcf853407b76a04b5f2a0 based on kernel > > 3.4.0-rc7, > > >> and qemu-kvm.git a1fce560c0e5f287ed65d2aaadb3e59578aaa983. > > >>>> > > >>>> We found 1 new bug and 1 bug got fixed in the past two weeks. > > >>>> > > >>>> New issue (1): > > >>>> 1. disk error when guest boot up via qcow2 image > > >>>> https://bugs.launchpad.net/qemu/+bug/1002121 > > >>>> -- Should be a regression on qemu-kvm. > > >>>> > > >>> > > >>> Kevin, is this the known regression in qcow2 or something new? > > >> > > >> If the commit ID is right, it must be something new. The regression that > > >> Marcelo found was fixed in 54e68143. > > >> > > > Yes, it's right. This should be a new regression. > > > I looked at the comment of 54e68143, and found it was not related the > > issue I reported. > > > > > >> The Launchpad bug refers to commit e54f008ef, which doesn't include > > this > > >> fix indeed. So was the test repeated with a more current qemu-kvm > > >> version after filing the bug in Launchpad, or is the commit ID in this > > >> mail wrong? > > >> > > > Latest commit 3fd9fedb in qemu-kvm master tree still has this issue. > > > And, the commit ID provided in Launchpad is correct. > > > > Can you please check if the bug exists in upstream qemu.git as well? > > > This bug doesn't exist on upstream qemu.git with latest commit: fd4567d9. > So, it should only exists on qemu-kvm tree.
Please bisect manually (not using git bisect), with the attached list of commits. These are the qemu -> qemu-kvm merge commits in the range described as bad/good.
4a808cd6ff25fa3d7f019dc56f9369c48c415645 87e51f4e6a5c07f336709d824fe7fe9e60c8f730 aa7159eea0f1f45c56235e77f40229d0d02c0384 9d81ede5d772c95c503f834a6c7ddc78c827209b c63457f3ebfb494d5a3968dfbe84971f3a3fc7b6 69bbfba89575ee0665dee605901184c69ab8e6db d0151e10d7e0d784fab1b7c895d0704ae0dee7d7 968fcfb5edc564ae5736251bb984a02caf2cfbf2 6c3937ec0b2ce7fbfd5c762c9aeb7aefd54c75ae 171d2f2249a360d7d623130d3aa991418c53716d fd453a24166e36a3d376c9bc221e520e3ee425af abc551bd456cf0407fa798395d83dc5aa35f6dbb 823ccf41509baa197dd6a3bef63837a6cf101ad8 be833bc6c2dc40929d1c815b8cbe26c2d9e6dc03 f2b8514f43036f948658cdcddd3c3428245adcac
