Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752505AbcDUOuS (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Apr 2016 10:50:18 -0400 Received: from torres.zugschlus.de ([85.214.131.164]:33528 "EHLO torres.zugschlus.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751767AbcDUOuQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Apr 2016 10:50:16 -0400 Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2016 16:50:05 +0200 From: Marc Haber To: Borislav Petkov Cc: Paolo Bonzini , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm ML Subject: Re: Major KVM issues with kernel 4.5 on the host Message-ID: <20160421145005.GI21755@torres.zugschlus.de> References: <20160317165435.GB3022@torres.zugschlus.de> <20160317181128.GA30324@pd.tnic> <56EBD20A.1020608@redhat.com> <20160413183701.GC7600@torres.zugschlus.de> <570EADD2.8030300@redhat.com> <20160413222942.GD7600@torres.zugschlus.de> <570EEF6D.40307@redhat.com> <20160414052220.GE7600@torres.zugschlus.de> <20160421083948.GF21755@torres.zugschlus.de> <20160421123711.GD28821@pd.tnic> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160421123711.GD28821@pd.tnic> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2420 Lines: 71 On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 02:37:11PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 10:39:48AM +0200, Marc Haber wrote: > > Currently, I cannot explain how this has happened, I must have flagged > > an actually good kernel as bad from my understanding of git bisect. > > > > Can you give advice how to continue here? > > Yap, sounds like you marked a bisection step incorrectly, which lead > into the wrong direction. How reliable is your reproducer? Usually, the crash or filesystem corruption happens in the first 15 to 30 minutes. I have had one instance running three hours before corrupting, I have therefore upped the run time to nine hours before saying "this kernel is good". What bothers me is that since I ended up with a "suspect" commit that actually results in a "good" kernel (running for 22 hours now), I must have said "bad" to an actually "good" kernel, which means that I had an unrelated crash or corruption. Is that reasoning correct? > Also, do the bisection as Paolo suggested: > > * try 45bdbcfdf241. That one qualified as "good" six days ago. I'll retry, maybe I just didn't wait long enough. "Trying" means make oldconfig, make deb-pkg in my case right? Does it matter what I answer to the numerous config questions that keep coming up during the oldconfig step? > * then do > > $ git bisect start v4.5-rc1 v4.4 > > which marks -rc1 as bad and 4.4 as good. Would it help to explicitly mark 0e749e54244eec87b2a3cd0a4314e60bc6781115 as good so that the knowledge gained during the last week is not completely lost? > While you're doing that bisect, do what Paolo said by applying the diff > here > > https://lkml.kernel.org/r/570EADD2.8030300@redhat.com > > when the bisection point you're at at each step contains > > 46896c73c1a4 ("KVM: svm: add support for RDTSCP") > > You should apply the above hunk by doing > > $ patch -p1 --dry-run -i /tmp/hunk > > If it applies fine, you then apply it > > $ patch -p1 -i /tmp/hunk > > All clear? So I need to git log | grep 46896c73c1a4 and apply the patch again each time the commit is found? Greetings Marc -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Marc Haber | "I don't trust Computers. They | Mailadresse im Header Leimen, Germany | lose things." Winona Ryder | Fon: *49 6224 1600402 Nordisch by Nature | How to make an American Quilt | Fax: *49 6224 1600421