On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 10:51:38PM +0400, Andrey Korolyov wrote: > On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 8:57 PM, Andrey Korolyov <and...@xdel.ru> wrote: > > On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 8:35 PM, Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com> wrote: > >> Il 24/08/2014 18:19, Andrey Korolyov ha scritto: > >>> Sorry, I was a bit inaccurate in my thoughts at Fri about necessary > >>> amount of work, patch lays perfectly on 3.10 with bit of monkey > >>> rewrites. The attached one fixed problem for me - it represents > >>> 0b10a1c87a2b0fb459baaefba9cb163dbb8d3344, > >>> 0bc830b05c667218d703f2026ec866c49df974fc, > >>> 44847dea79751e95665a439f8c63a65e51da8e1f and > >>> 673f7b4257a1fe7b181e1a1182ecc2b6b2b795f1. > >> > >> So, with these changes, Marcelo's patch does not hang up your guest > >> anymore? > >> > >> Paolo > >> > > > > If I may reword, Marcelo`s proposed states sync with revert-revert of > > agraf`s patch, does not break anything for Windows (migration works > > well for any variant of emulator with modified kernel modules). Let me > > check if initially reported issue (lost I/O interrupts) is gone for > > the current situation (patched kernel plus Marcelo` patch). > > > patched kernel + any 2.1 variant + Windows = works > patched kernel + patched 2.1 + Linux + disk workload = works fine
Andrey, What patch is this again ? > bare kernel + any 2.1 variant + Windows = disk stale > bare kernel + proposed patch from Marcelo + Linux + disk workload = > works fine (bare kernel + 2.1 release works at this point as tested > earlier) > > Also guest 3.10.52 caused literally a rain of WTFs crashing emulator > with an emulation error in every case tested with live migration... > 3.10.11 works fine. There will be another report soon I suppose though > it is nearly impossible to do a proper bisection in a sane time.
