On 2/13/26 17:04, Dmitry Osipenko wrote: > On 2/13/26 16:30, Michael Tokarev wrote: >> 13.02.2026 02:57, Joelle van Dyne wrpte: >>> On Thu, Feb 12, 2026 at 3:00 AM Dmitry Osipenko >>> <[email protected]> wrote:...>> Joelle, are you aware of >>> this problem with the version that got applied >>>> to the qemu/staging tree? If yes, could you please send patch fixing it? >> >>> Unfortunately, this means that the patch should not have been back >>> ported. It is possible that the crash which this patch was addressing >>> was introduced as a result of changes elsewhere. For example >>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected] >>> tokyo.ac.jp/ >>> changed some internal mechanics of finalize. I didn't raise any >>> objection to the back port because it seemed like the original code >>> where the object was its own parent was wrong but I guess it was >>> working fine somehow. I think in the meantime the best course of >>> action is to revert the patch in the stable branches. >> >> Ok, it was me who thought it's a good idea to apply it to stable branches. >> Sure thing, if it's wrong, I should revert it. >> >> Do I understand it correctly that in current master, this change is okay, >> due to other changes (maybe like the above-mentioned one), but in previous >> stable versions, it is not? >> >> Should I make another stable release to fix this one? I mean, how serious >> it is? >> >> I'm sorry for the trouble. > > I tested master and stable 10.1.4 in addition to the staging branch, all > three are broken by this patch. Hence the patch is wrong in the first > place and not fixing anything.
Once again, Joelle needs to explain how to reproduce the addressed problem as virgl and venus are known to work properly. I suggest to revert the patch from all branches and try again with another version later after clarifications from Joelle. -- Best regards, Dmitry
