Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> I have tried this branch, and the data get corrupted another way. This
> is due to the fact that the source address is not incremented for the
> second write. The patch below fixes that.
>
> With this patch, I haven't be able to make any corruption. I have added
> a printk i
On Mon, Jul 23, 2007 at 01:34:29AM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 22, 2007 at 08:34:37PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> > Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> > > On Sun, Jul 22, 2007 at 04:46:19PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> > >
> > >> If you do happen to get a same-size corruption, that may tell us
On Sun, Jul 22, 2007 at 08:34:37PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 22, 2007 at 04:46:19PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> >
> >> If you do happen to get a same-size corruption, that may tell us more.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > I have just got one same-size corruption buil
On Sun, Jul 22, 2007 at 08:34:37PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 22, 2007 at 04:46:19PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> >
> >> If you do happen to get a same-size corruption, that may tell us more.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > I have just got one same-size corruption buil
Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 22, 2007 at 04:46:19PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
>
>> If you do happen to get a same-size corruption, that may tell us more.
>>
>>
>
> I have just got one same-size corruption building glibc 2.6 on
> GNU/kFreeBSD i386 (32-bit nonpae).
>
> One byte at addr
On Sun, Jul 22, 2007 at 04:46:19PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> If you do happen to get a same-size corruption, that may tell us more.
>
I have just got one same-size corruption building glibc 2.6 on
GNU/kFreeBSD i386 (32-bit nonpae).
One byte at address 0x9000 has been replaced by 0x00. Please f
Aurelien Jarno wrote:
>>
>> btw, are you running a parallel make (-jN)?
>>
>
> I wasn't using -j until a few hours. I am now trying -j2 with SMP
> guests. I already get what I think is a corruption, a parse error from
> ld on a file generated by gcc. Unfortunately I don't have the corrupted
>
On Sun, Jul 22, 2007 at 06:14:16PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> >
> >>How would I go about reproducing this? Is a single ./configure; make
> >>clean; make in a loop compiling gcc sufficient?
> >>
> >
> >Yes basically that's what I am doing but on the glibc sources as
Aurelien Jarno wrote:
>
>> How would I go about reproducing this? Is a single ./configure; make
>> clean; make in a loop compiling gcc sufficient?
>>
>
> Yes basically that's what I am doing but on the glibc sources as I get
> more "success" to reproduce the bug. Note that you should ru
Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 22, 2007 at 10:52:03AM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
>
>> Aurelien Jarno wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> For a long time I am seeing data corruption in guests when using KVM,
>>> but I am convinced only since today that the problem comes from KVM.
>>>
>>> The sy
On Sun, Jul 22, 2007 at 10:52:03AM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > For a long time I am seeing data corruption in guests when using KVM,
> > but I am convinced only since today that the problem comes from KVM.
> >
> > The symptoms are a few bytes that are mangle
Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> For a long time I am seeing data corruption in guests when using KVM,
> but I am convinced only since today that the problem comes from KVM.
>
> The symptoms are a few bytes that are mangled to 0x00 in a file that has
> been written. For now I have only seen 2 or
On Sat, Jul 21, 2007 at 01:03:42PM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> >I am using raw files for the disk in all cases.
> >
> >Note that I have just seen a three bytes corruption. Building the glibc
> >seems to be a good way to reproduce the bug, as a lot of source files
> >are generated on the fly dur
Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 21, 2007 at 12:46:29PM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>
>> Aurelien Jarno wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> For a long time I am seeing data corruption in guests when using KVM,
>>> but I am convinced only since today that the problem comes from KVM.
>>>
>>> T
On Sat, Jul 21, 2007 at 12:46:29PM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> >Hi all,
> >
> >For a long time I am seeing data corruption in guests when using KVM,
> >but I am convinced only since today that the problem comes from KVM.
> >
> >The symptoms are a few bytes that are mangl
Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> For a long time I am seeing data corruption in guests when using KVM,
> but I am convinced only since today that the problem comes from KVM.
>
> The symptoms are a few bytes that are mangled to 0x00 in a file that has
> been written. For now I have only seen 2 or
Hi all,
For a long time I am seeing data corruption in guests when using KVM,
but I am convinced only since today that the problem comes from KVM.
The symptoms are a few bytes that are mangled to 0x00 in a file that has
been written. For now I have only seen 2 or 4 consecutive bytes mangled,
but
17 matches
Mail list logo
