qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: Endless loop in qcow2_alloc_cluster_offset


From: Kevin Wolf
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: Endless loop in qcow2_alloc_cluster_offset
Date: Tue, 08 Dec 2009 15:51:31 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.4pre) Gecko/20091014 Fedora/3.0-2.8.b4.fc11 Thunderbird/3.0b4

Am 07.12.2009 16:00, schrieb Kevin Wolf:
> Am 07.12.2009 15:16, schrieb Jan Kiszka:
>>> Likely not. What I did was nothing special, and I did not noticed such a
>>> crash in the last months.
>>
>> And now it happened again (qemu-kvm head, during kernel installation
>> from network onto local qcow2-disk). Any clever idea how to proceed with
>> this?
> 
> I still haven't seen this and I still have no theory on what could be
> happening here. I'm just trying to write down what I think must happen
> to get into this situation. Maybe you can point at something I'm missing
> or maybe it helps you to have a sudden inspiration.
> 
> The crash happens because we have a loop in the s->cluster_allocs list.
> A loop can only be created by inserting an object twice. The only insert
> to this list happens in qcow2_alloc_cluster_offset (though an earlier
> call than that of the stack trace).
> 
> There is only one relevant caller of this function, qcow_aio_write_cb.
> Part of it is a call to run_dependent_requests which removes the request
> from s->cluster_allocs. So after the QLIST_REMOVE in
> run_dependent_requests the request can't be contained in the list, but
> at the call of qcow2_alloc_cluster_offset it must be contained again. It
> must be added somewhere in between these two calls.
> 
> In qcow_aio_write_cb there isn't much happening between these calls. The
> only thing that could somehow become dangerous is the
> qcow_aio_write_cb(req, 0); for queued requests in run_dependent_requests.

Hm, you're using only one disk, and it's an IDE disk, right? Then the
queue of dependent requests should be empty anyway, so no dangerous
calls here. Maybe your theory of a memory corruption is the better one.

Kevin




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]