[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v13 00/10] Block replication for continuous chec
From: |
Wen Congyang |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v13 00/10] Block replication for continuous checkpoints |
Date: |
Mon, 25 Jan 2016 09:06:29 +0800 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.0 |
On 01/22/2016 11:14 PM, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> Hi,
> I can trigger a segfault if I wire in the block replication together with
> a quorum instance; it only triggers with both of them present but,
> it looks like the problem is a disagreement about the number of quorum
> members; I'm triggering this on the 'colo-v2.4-periodic-mode' branch
> that is posted in the colo-framework set that I think includes this set
> (from https://github.com/coloft/qemu.git).
>
> To trigger:
> ./git/colo/jan-16/try/x86_64-softmmu/qemu-system-x86_64 -nographic -S
>
> (qemu) drive_add 0
> if=none,id=colo-disk0,file.filename=/home/localvms/bugzilla.raw,driver=raw,node-name=node0
> (qemu) drive_add 1
> if=none,id=active-disk0,throttling.bps-total=70000000,driver=replication,mode=secondary,file.driver=qcow2,file.file.filename=/run/colo-active-disk.qcow2,file.backing.driver=qcow2,file.backing.file.filename=/run/colo-hidden-disk.qcow2,file.backing.backing=colo-disk0
> (qemu) drive_add 2
> if=none,id=top-quorum,driver=quorum,read-pattern=fifo,vote-threshold=1,children.0=active-disk0
> (qemu) device_add virtio-blk-pci,drive=top-quorum,addr=9
>
> *** Error in `/root/colo/jan-2016/./try/x86_64-softmmu/qemu-system-x86_64':
> free(): invalid pointer: 0x0000555555a8fdf0 ***
> ======= Backtrace: =========
> /lib64/libc.so.6(+0x7cfe1)[0x7ffff110ffe1]
> /lib64/libglib-2.0.so.0(g_free+0xf)[0x7ffff1ecc36f]
> /root/colo/jan-2016/./try/x86_64-softmmu/qemu-system-x86_64
> Program received signal SIGABRT, Aborted.
> 0x00007ffff10c85f7 in raise () from /lib64/libc.so.6
> (gdb) where
> #0 0x00007ffff10c85f7 in raise () from /lib64/libc.so.6
> #1 0x00007ffff10c9ce8 in abort () from /lib64/libc.so.6
> #2 0x00007ffff1108317 in __libc_message () from /lib64/libc.so.6
> #3 0x00007ffff110ffe1 in _int_free () from /lib64/libc.so.6
> #4 0x00007ffff1ecc36f in g_free () from /lib64/libglib-2.0.so.0
> #5 0x00005555559dfdd7 in qemu_iovec_destroy (qiov=0x555557815410) at
> /root/colo/jan-2016/qemu/util/iov.c:378
> #6 0x0000555555989cce in quorum_aio_finalize (acb=0x555557815350) at
> /root/colo/jan-2016/qemu/block/quorum.c:171
> 171 qemu_iovec_destroy(&acb->qcrs[i].qiov);
> (gdb) list
> 166
> 167 if (acb->is_read) {
> 168 /* on the quorum case acb->child_iter == s->num_children - 1 */
> 169 for (i = 0; i <= acb->child_iter; i++) {
> 170 qemu_vfree(acb->qcrs[i].buf);
> 171 qemu_iovec_destroy(&acb->qcrs[i].qiov);
> 172 }
> 173 }
> 174
> 175 g_free(acb->qcrs);
> (gdb) p acb->child_iter
> $1 = 1
> (gdb) p i
> $3 = 1
Thanks for your test. Can you give me the following information:
1. acb->ret's value
2. s->num_children
I think it is quorum's bug, and acb->ret is < 0.
Thanks
Wen Congyang
>
> #7 0x000055555598afca in quorum_aio_cb (opaque=<optimized out>, ret=-5)
> at /root/colo/jan-2016/qemu/block/quorum.c:302
> #8 0x00005555559990ee in bdrv_co_complete (acb=0x555557815410) at
> /root/colo/jan-2016/qemu/block/io.c:2122
> .....
>
> So I guess acb->child_iter is wrong, since we only have one child on that
> quorum?
> and we're trying to do a destroy on the second child.
>
> Dave
> --
> Dr. David Alan Gilbert / address@hidden / Manchester, UK
>
>
> .
>