[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAAts5mPGV+u+r5cr4Ry+ePOpJSDY0BKY_T4A+hPaXVTWXL=TDg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2014 15:44:47 +0100
From: Alexey Lapitsky <lex.public@...il.com>
To: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
Cc: Dave Airlie <airlied@...il.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: BUG_ON in virtio-ring.c
Hi,
Sorry for the long delay. It prints exactly the same:
[ 3.792033] virtqueue elements = 128, max_segments = 126 (1 queues)
[ 3.802191] vda: vda1 vda2 < vda5 >
A little bit more about my setup (if it helps):
It's a qemu-system-x86_64 kvm instance with 16 cores and 10G of RAM.
I can reproduce the bug every time with mkfs.btrfs on a 10GB LVM
volume (right after the reboot).
I have almost no knowledge of vring / virtio.
Is it correct that we need just one sg_elem entry in the vq->vring if
vq->indirect flag is set?
That's what I thought when applying the "BUG_ON(total_sg >
vq->vring.num && !vq->indirect)" patch.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists