Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753232AbdDGGYN (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Apr 2017 02:24:13 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:45330 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752245AbdDGGYF (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Apr 2017 02:24:05 -0400 DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com 93DA380484 Authentication-Results: ext-mx04.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: ext-mx04.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=mst@redhat.com DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mx1.redhat.com 93DA380484 Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2017 09:24:03 +0300 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" To: Mike Galbraith Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Thorsten Leemhuis , virtio-dev@lists.oasis-open.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List , rjones@redhat.com Subject: Re: Random guest crashes since 5c34d002dcc7 ("virtio_pci: use shared interrupts for virtqueues") Message-ID: <20170407090354-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> References: <20170404213702-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <1491361749.4536.69.camel@gmx.de> <20170405060806-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <1491362670.4536.78.camel@gmx.de> <1491363606.4536.80.camel@gmx.de> <20170405065123-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <1491366290.4536.114.camel@gmx.de> <20170405062934.GA26528@lst.de> <20170406003349-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <1491544999.5501.7.camel@gmx.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1491544999.5501.7.camel@gmx.de> X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.28]); Fri, 07 Apr 2017 06:24:04 +0000 (UTC) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1069 Lines: 31 On Fri, Apr 07, 2017 at 08:03:19AM +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > On Thu, 2017-04-06 at 00:38 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > What I did is a revert the refactorings while keeping the affinity API - > > we can safely postpone them until the next release without loss of > > functionality. But that's on top of my testing tree so it has unrelated > > stuff as well. I'm rather confident they aren't fixing the issues but > > I'll prepare a bugfix-only tree now for testing. > > Test tag works fine here w/wo threadirqs, RT works as well. > > -Mike Thanks a lot. OK I pushed out two new tags test1 with just the cleanup reverts test2 with a bugfix in this area I would very much appreciate your testing report on both - should be ok but better make sure. Unfortunately it's past 2am here so I don't have the time to test - and I'm at a conference so not a lot of time during the day either. Christoph, I still think your cleanups were a good idea, but we need get this release into a stable shape ASAP. Let's try again for the next release, OK? -- MST