[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: any remaining for-6.0 issues?
From: |
Cornelia Huck |
Subject: |
Re: any remaining for-6.0 issues? |
Date: |
Tue, 20 Apr 2021 11:58:07 +0200 |
On Mon, 19 Apr 2021 20:38:05 +0100
Mark Cave-Ayland <mark.cave-ayland@ilande.co.uk> wrote:
> On 19/04/2021 18:02, Cornelia Huck wrote:
>
> >> That patch seems to be our best candidate so far, but the intermittent
> >> nature of the failures make it hard to pin down... I don't see anything
> >> obviously wrong with the patch, maybe some linux-user experts have a
> >> better idea?
> >
> > FWIW, I tried reproducing the issue on some local systems (no luck),
> > and on code pushed out to gitlab (where it works most of the time, and
> > the user builds where it fails are unpredictable.)
> >
> > I fear the best we can do right now is stare at the code and try to
> > figure out what might be wrong :(
>
> Is there any particular reason why the unsigned long cast was removed from
> the front?
> Could that have an effect?
Indeed, that looks strange.
Will give it a try with the cast readded, but I'm still unable to
reproduce the error reliably...
- Re: any remaining for-6.0 issues?, (continued)
- Re: any remaining for-6.0 issues?, Thomas Huth, 2021/04/14
- Re: any remaining for-6.0 issues?, Peter Maydell, 2021/04/17
- Re: any remaining for-6.0 issues?, Mark Cave-Ayland, 2021/04/18
- Re: any remaining for-6.0 issues?, Cornelia Huck, 2021/04/19
- Re: any remaining for-6.0 issues?, Cornelia Huck, 2021/04/19
- Re: any remaining for-6.0 issues?, Mark Cave-Ayland, 2021/04/19
- Re: any remaining for-6.0 issues?,
Cornelia Huck <=