summary refs log tree commit diff stats
path: root/results/classifier/014/user-level
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'results/classifier/014/user-level')
-rw-r--r--results/classifier/014/user-level/23270873719
-rw-r--r--results/classifier/014/user-level/28596630140
-rw-r--r--results/classifier/014/user-level/80615920375
3 files changed, 1234 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/results/classifier/014/user-level/23270873 b/results/classifier/014/user-level/23270873
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..3cf889b8d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/results/classifier/014/user-level/23270873
@@ -0,0 +1,719 @@
+user-level: 0.896
+mistranslation: 0.881
+risc-v: 0.859
+operating system: 0.844
+boot: 0.830
+TCG: 0.828
+ppc: 0.827
+vnc: 0.820
+peripherals: 0.820
+device: 0.810
+hypervisor: 0.806
+KVM: 0.803
+virtual: 0.802
+permissions: 0.802
+register: 0.797
+VMM: 0.792
+debug: 0.788
+assembly: 0.768
+network: 0.768
+graphic: 0.764
+arm: 0.761
+socket: 0.758
+semantic: 0.752
+performance: 0.744
+architecture: 0.742
+kernel: 0.735
+PID: 0.731
+x86: 0.730
+files: 0.730
+alpha: 0.712
+i386: 0.705
+
+[Qemu-devel] [BUG?] aio_get_linux_aio: Assertion `ctx->linux_aio' failed
+
+Hi,
+
+I am seeing some strange QEMU assertion failures for qemu on s390x,
+which prevents a guest from starting.
+
+Git bisecting points to the following commit as the source of the error.
+
+commit ed6e2161715c527330f936d44af4c547f25f687e
+Author: Nishanth Aravamudan <address@hidden>
+Date:   Fri Jun 22 12:37:00 2018 -0700
+
+    linux-aio: properly bubble up errors from initialization
+
+    laio_init() can fail for a couple of reasons, which will lead to a NULL
+    pointer dereference in laio_attach_aio_context().
+
+    To solve this, add a aio_setup_linux_aio() function which is called
+    early in raw_open_common. If this fails, propagate the error up. The
+    signature of aio_get_linux_aio() was not modified, because it seems
+    preferable to return the actual errno from the possible failing
+    initialization calls.
+
+    Additionally, when the AioContext changes, we need to associate a
+    LinuxAioState with the new AioContext. Use the bdrv_attach_aio_context
+    callback and call the new aio_setup_linux_aio(), which will allocate a
+new AioContext if needed, and return errors on failures. If it
+fails for
+any reason, fallback to threaded AIO with an error message, as the
+    device is already in-use by the guest.
+
+    Add an assert that aio_get_linux_aio() cannot return NULL.
+
+    Signed-off-by: Nishanth Aravamudan <address@hidden>
+    Message-id: address@hidden
+    Signed-off-by: Stefan Hajnoczi <address@hidden>
+Not sure what is causing this assertion to fail. Here is the qemu
+command line of the guest, from qemu log, which throws this error:
+LC_ALL=C PATH=/usr/local/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin
+QEMU_AUDIO_DRV=none /usr/local/bin/qemu-system-s390x -name
+guest=rt_vm1,debug-threads=on -S -object
+secret,id=masterKey0,format=raw,file=/var/lib/libvirt/qemu/domain-21-rt_vm1/master-key.aes
+-machine s390-ccw-virtio-2.12,accel=kvm,usb=off,dump-guest-core=off -m
+1024 -realtime mlock=off -smp 4,sockets=4,cores=1,threads=1 -object
+iothread,id=iothread1 -uuid 0cde16cd-091d-41bd-9ac2-5243df5c9a0d
+-display none -no-user-config -nodefaults -chardev
+socket,id=charmonitor,fd=28,server,nowait -mon
+chardev=charmonitor,id=monitor,mode=control -rtc base=utc -no-shutdown
+-boot strict=on -drive
+file=/dev/mapper/360050763998b0883980000002a000031,format=raw,if=none,id=drive-virtio-disk0,cache=none,aio=native
+-device
+virtio-blk-ccw,iothread=iothread1,scsi=off,devno=fe.0.0001,drive=drive-virtio-disk0,id=virtio-disk0,bootindex=1,write-cache=on
+-netdev tap,fd=30,id=hostnet0,vhost=on,vhostfd=31 -device
+virtio-net-ccw,netdev=hostnet0,id=net0,mac=02:3a:c8:67:95:84,devno=fe.0.0000
+-netdev tap,fd=32,id=hostnet1,vhost=on,vhostfd=33 -device
+virtio-net-ccw,netdev=hostnet1,id=net1,mac=52:54:00:2a:e5:08,devno=fe.0.0002
+-chardev pty,id=charconsole0 -device
+sclpconsole,chardev=charconsole0,id=console0 -device
+virtio-balloon-ccw,id=balloon0,devno=fe.3.ffba -sandbox
+on,obsolete=deny,elevateprivileges=deny,spawn=deny,resourcecontrol=deny
+-msg timestamp=on
+2018-07-17 15:48:42.252+0000: Domain id=21 is tainted: high-privileges
+2018-07-17T15:48:42.279380Z qemu-system-s390x: -chardev
+pty,id=charconsole0: char device redirected to /dev/pts/3 (label
+charconsole0)
+qemu-system-s390x: util/async.c:339: aio_get_linux_aio: Assertion
+`ctx->linux_aio' failed.
+2018-07-17 15:48:43.309+0000: shutting down, reason=failed
+
+
+Any help debugging this would be greatly appreciated.
+
+Thank you
+Farhan
+
+On 17.07.2018 [13:25:53 -0400], Farhan Ali wrote:
+>
+Hi,
+>
+>
+I am seeing some strange QEMU assertion failures for qemu on s390x,
+>
+which prevents a guest from starting.
+>
+>
+Git bisecting points to the following commit as the source of the error.
+>
+>
+commit ed6e2161715c527330f936d44af4c547f25f687e
+>
+Author: Nishanth Aravamudan <address@hidden>
+>
+Date:   Fri Jun 22 12:37:00 2018 -0700
+>
+>
+linux-aio: properly bubble up errors from initialization
+>
+>
+laio_init() can fail for a couple of reasons, which will lead to a NULL
+>
+pointer dereference in laio_attach_aio_context().
+>
+>
+To solve this, add a aio_setup_linux_aio() function which is called
+>
+early in raw_open_common. If this fails, propagate the error up. The
+>
+signature of aio_get_linux_aio() was not modified, because it seems
+>
+preferable to return the actual errno from the possible failing
+>
+initialization calls.
+>
+>
+Additionally, when the AioContext changes, we need to associate a
+>
+LinuxAioState with the new AioContext. Use the bdrv_attach_aio_context
+>
+callback and call the new aio_setup_linux_aio(), which will allocate a
+>
+new AioContext if needed, and return errors on failures. If it fails for
+>
+any reason, fallback to threaded AIO with an error message, as the
+>
+device is already in-use by the guest.
+>
+>
+Add an assert that aio_get_linux_aio() cannot return NULL.
+>
+>
+Signed-off-by: Nishanth Aravamudan <address@hidden>
+>
+Message-id: address@hidden
+>
+Signed-off-by: Stefan Hajnoczi <address@hidden>
+>
+>
+>
+Not sure what is causing this assertion to fail. Here is the qemu command
+>
+line of the guest, from qemu log, which throws this error:
+>
+>
+>
+LC_ALL=C PATH=/usr/local/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin
+>
+QEMU_AUDIO_DRV=none /usr/local/bin/qemu-system-s390x -name
+>
+guest=rt_vm1,debug-threads=on -S -object
+>
+secret,id=masterKey0,format=raw,file=/var/lib/libvirt/qemu/domain-21-rt_vm1/master-key.aes
+>
+-machine s390-ccw-virtio-2.12,accel=kvm,usb=off,dump-guest-core=off -m 1024
+>
+-realtime mlock=off -smp 4,sockets=4,cores=1,threads=1 -object
+>
+iothread,id=iothread1 -uuid 0cde16cd-091d-41bd-9ac2-5243df5c9a0d -display
+>
+none -no-user-config -nodefaults -chardev
+>
+socket,id=charmonitor,fd=28,server,nowait -mon
+>
+chardev=charmonitor,id=monitor,mode=control -rtc base=utc -no-shutdown -boot
+>
+strict=on -drive
+>
+file=/dev/mapper/360050763998b0883980000002a000031,format=raw,if=none,id=drive-virtio-disk0,cache=none,aio=native
+>
+-device
+>
+virtio-blk-ccw,iothread=iothread1,scsi=off,devno=fe.0.0001,drive=drive-virtio-disk0,id=virtio-disk0,bootindex=1,write-cache=on
+>
+-netdev tap,fd=30,id=hostnet0,vhost=on,vhostfd=31 -device
+>
+virtio-net-ccw,netdev=hostnet0,id=net0,mac=02:3a:c8:67:95:84,devno=fe.0.0000
+>
+-netdev tap,fd=32,id=hostnet1,vhost=on,vhostfd=33 -device
+>
+virtio-net-ccw,netdev=hostnet1,id=net1,mac=52:54:00:2a:e5:08,devno=fe.0.0002
+>
+-chardev pty,id=charconsole0 -device
+>
+sclpconsole,chardev=charconsole0,id=console0 -device
+>
+virtio-balloon-ccw,id=balloon0,devno=fe.3.ffba -sandbox
+>
+on,obsolete=deny,elevateprivileges=deny,spawn=deny,resourcecontrol=deny -msg
+>
+timestamp=on
+>
+>
+>
+>
+2018-07-17 15:48:42.252+0000: Domain id=21 is tainted: high-privileges
+>
+2018-07-17T15:48:42.279380Z qemu-system-s390x: -chardev pty,id=charconsole0:
+>
+char device redirected to /dev/pts/3 (label charconsole0)
+>
+qemu-system-s390x: util/async.c:339: aio_get_linux_aio: Assertion
+>
+`ctx->linux_aio' failed.
+>
+2018-07-17 15:48:43.309+0000: shutting down, reason=failed
+>
+>
+>
+Any help debugging this would be greatly appreciated.
+iiuc, this possibly implies AIO was not actually used previously on this
+guest (it might have silently been falling back to threaded IO?). I
+don't have access to s390x, but would it be possible to run qemu under
+gdb and see if aio_setup_linux_aio is being called at all (I think it
+might not be, but I'm not sure why), and if so, if it's for the context
+in question?
+
+If it's not being called first, could you see what callpath is calling
+aio_get_linux_aio when this assertion trips?
+
+Thanks!
+-Nish
+
+On 07/17/2018 04:52 PM, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
+iiuc, this possibly implies AIO was not actually used previously on this
+guest (it might have silently been falling back to threaded IO?). I
+don't have access to s390x, but would it be possible to run qemu under
+gdb and see if aio_setup_linux_aio is being called at all (I think it
+might not be, but I'm not sure why), and if so, if it's for the context
+in question?
+
+If it's not being called first, could you see what callpath is calling
+aio_get_linux_aio when this assertion trips?
+
+Thanks!
+-Nish
+Hi Nishant,
+From the coredump of the guest this is the call trace that calls
+aio_get_linux_aio:
+Stack trace of thread 145158:
+#0  0x000003ff94dbe274 raise (libc.so.6)
+#1  0x000003ff94da39a8 abort (libc.so.6)
+#2  0x000003ff94db62ce __assert_fail_base (libc.so.6)
+#3  0x000003ff94db634c __assert_fail (libc.so.6)
+#4  0x000002aa20db067a aio_get_linux_aio (qemu-system-s390x)
+#5  0x000002aa20d229a8 raw_aio_plug (qemu-system-s390x)
+#6  0x000002aa20d309ee bdrv_io_plug (qemu-system-s390x)
+#7  0x000002aa20b5a8ea virtio_blk_handle_vq (qemu-system-s390x)
+#8  0x000002aa20db2f6e aio_dispatch_handlers (qemu-system-s390x)
+#9  0x000002aa20db3c34 aio_poll (qemu-system-s390x)
+#10 0x000002aa20be32a2 iothread_run (qemu-system-s390x)
+#11 0x000003ff94f879a8 start_thread (libpthread.so.0)
+#12 0x000003ff94e797ee thread_start (libc.so.6)
+
+
+Thanks for taking a look and responding.
+
+Thanks
+Farhan
+
+On 07/18/2018 09:42 AM, Farhan Ali wrote:
+On 07/17/2018 04:52 PM, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
+iiuc, this possibly implies AIO was not actually used previously on this
+guest (it might have silently been falling back to threaded IO?). I
+don't have access to s390x, but would it be possible to run qemu under
+gdb and see if aio_setup_linux_aio is being called at all (I think it
+might not be, but I'm not sure why), and if so, if it's for the context
+in question?
+
+If it's not being called first, could you see what callpath is calling
+aio_get_linux_aio when this assertion trips?
+
+Thanks!
+-Nish
+Hi Nishant,
+From the coredump of the guest this is the call trace that calls
+aio_get_linux_aio:
+Stack trace of thread 145158:
+#0  0x000003ff94dbe274 raise (libc.so.6)
+#1  0x000003ff94da39a8 abort (libc.so.6)
+#2  0x000003ff94db62ce __assert_fail_base (libc.so.6)
+#3  0x000003ff94db634c __assert_fail (libc.so.6)
+#4  0x000002aa20db067a aio_get_linux_aio (qemu-system-s390x)
+#5  0x000002aa20d229a8 raw_aio_plug (qemu-system-s390x)
+#6  0x000002aa20d309ee bdrv_io_plug (qemu-system-s390x)
+#7  0x000002aa20b5a8ea virtio_blk_handle_vq (qemu-system-s390x)
+#8  0x000002aa20db2f6e aio_dispatch_handlers (qemu-system-s390x)
+#9  0x000002aa20db3c34 aio_poll (qemu-system-s390x)
+#10 0x000002aa20be32a2 iothread_run (qemu-system-s390x)
+#11 0x000003ff94f879a8 start_thread (libpthread.so.0)
+#12 0x000003ff94e797ee thread_start (libc.so.6)
+
+
+Thanks for taking a look and responding.
+
+Thanks
+Farhan
+Trying to debug a little further, the block device in this case is a
+"host device". And looking at your commit carefully you use the
+bdrv_attach_aio_context callback to setup a Linux AioContext.
+For some reason the "host device" struct (BlockDriver bdrv_host_device
+in block/file-posix.c) does not have a bdrv_attach_aio_context defined.
+So a simple change of adding the callback to the struct solves the issue
+and the guest starts fine.
+diff --git a/block/file-posix.c b/block/file-posix.c
+index 28824aa..b8d59fb 100644
+--- a/block/file-posix.c
++++ b/block/file-posix.c
+@@ -3135,6 +3135,7 @@ static BlockDriver bdrv_host_device = {
+     .bdrv_refresh_limits = raw_refresh_limits,
+     .bdrv_io_plug = raw_aio_plug,
+     .bdrv_io_unplug = raw_aio_unplug,
++    .bdrv_attach_aio_context = raw_aio_attach_aio_context,
+
+     .bdrv_co_truncate       = raw_co_truncate,
+     .bdrv_getlength    = raw_getlength,
+I am not too familiar with block device code in QEMU, so not sure if
+this is the right fix or if there are some underlying problems.
+Thanks
+Farhan
+
+On 18.07.2018 [11:10:27 -0400], Farhan Ali wrote:
+>
+>
+>
+On 07/18/2018 09:42 AM, Farhan Ali wrote:
+>
+>
+>
+>
+>
+> On 07/17/2018 04:52 PM, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
+>
+> > iiuc, this possibly implies AIO was not actually used previously on this
+>
+> > guest (it might have silently been falling back to threaded IO?). I
+>
+> > don't have access to s390x, but would it be possible to run qemu under
+>
+> > gdb and see if aio_setup_linux_aio is being called at all (I think it
+>
+> > might not be, but I'm not sure why), and if so, if it's for the context
+>
+> > in question?
+>
+> >
+>
+> > If it's not being called first, could you see what callpath is calling
+>
+> > aio_get_linux_aio when this assertion trips?
+>
+> >
+>
+> > Thanks!
+>
+> > -Nish
+>
+>
+>
+>
+>
+> Hi Nishant,
+>
+>
+>
+>  From the coredump of the guest this is the call trace that calls
+>
+> aio_get_linux_aio:
+>
+>
+>
+>
+>
+> Stack trace of thread 145158:
+>
+> #0  0x000003ff94dbe274 raise (libc.so.6)
+>
+> #1  0x000003ff94da39a8 abort (libc.so.6)
+>
+> #2  0x000003ff94db62ce __assert_fail_base (libc.so.6)
+>
+> #3  0x000003ff94db634c __assert_fail (libc.so.6)
+>
+> #4  0x000002aa20db067a aio_get_linux_aio (qemu-system-s390x)
+>
+> #5  0x000002aa20d229a8 raw_aio_plug (qemu-system-s390x)
+>
+> #6  0x000002aa20d309ee bdrv_io_plug (qemu-system-s390x)
+>
+> #7  0x000002aa20b5a8ea virtio_blk_handle_vq (qemu-system-s390x)
+>
+> #8  0x000002aa20db2f6e aio_dispatch_handlers (qemu-system-s390x)
+>
+> #9  0x000002aa20db3c34 aio_poll (qemu-system-s390x)
+>
+> #10 0x000002aa20be32a2 iothread_run (qemu-system-s390x)
+>
+> #11 0x000003ff94f879a8 start_thread (libpthread.so.0)
+>
+> #12 0x000003ff94e797ee thread_start (libc.so.6)
+>
+>
+>
+>
+>
+> Thanks for taking a look and responding.
+>
+>
+>
+> Thanks
+>
+> Farhan
+>
+>
+>
+>
+>
+>
+>
+>
+Trying to debug a little further, the block device in this case is a "host
+>
+device". And looking at your commit carefully you use the
+>
+bdrv_attach_aio_context callback to setup a Linux AioContext.
+>
+>
+For some reason the "host device" struct (BlockDriver bdrv_host_device in
+>
+block/file-posix.c) does not have a bdrv_attach_aio_context defined.
+>
+So a simple change of adding the callback to the struct solves the issue and
+>
+the guest starts fine.
+>
+>
+>
+diff --git a/block/file-posix.c b/block/file-posix.c
+>
+index 28824aa..b8d59fb 100644
+>
+--- a/block/file-posix.c
+>
++++ b/block/file-posix.c
+>
+@@ -3135,6 +3135,7 @@ static BlockDriver bdrv_host_device = {
+>
+.bdrv_refresh_limits = raw_refresh_limits,
+>
+.bdrv_io_plug = raw_aio_plug,
+>
+.bdrv_io_unplug = raw_aio_unplug,
+>
++    .bdrv_attach_aio_context = raw_aio_attach_aio_context,
+>
+>
+.bdrv_co_truncate       = raw_co_truncate,
+>
+.bdrv_getlength    = raw_getlength,
+>
+>
+>
+>
+I am not too familiar with block device code in QEMU, so not sure if
+>
+this is the right fix or if there are some underlying problems.
+Oh this is quite embarassing! I only added the bdrv_attach_aio_context
+callback for the file-backed device. Your fix is definitely corect for
+host device. Let me make sure there weren't any others missed and I will
+send out a properly formatted patch. Thank you for the quick testing and
+turnaround!
+
+-Nish
+
+On 07/18/2018 08:52 PM, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
+>
+On 18.07.2018 [11:10:27 -0400], Farhan Ali wrote:
+>
+>
+>
+>
+>
+> On 07/18/2018 09:42 AM, Farhan Ali wrote:
+>
+>>
+>
+>>
+>
+>> On 07/17/2018 04:52 PM, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
+>
+>>> iiuc, this possibly implies AIO was not actually used previously on this
+>
+>>> guest (it might have silently been falling back to threaded IO?). I
+>
+>>> don't have access to s390x, but would it be possible to run qemu under
+>
+>>> gdb and see if aio_setup_linux_aio is being called at all (I think it
+>
+>>> might not be, but I'm not sure why), and if so, if it's for the context
+>
+>>> in question?
+>
+>>>
+>
+>>> If it's not being called first, could you see what callpath is calling
+>
+>>> aio_get_linux_aio when this assertion trips?
+>
+>>>
+>
+>>> Thanks!
+>
+>>> -Nish
+>
+>>
+>
+>>
+>
+>> Hi Nishant,
+>
+>>
+>
+>>  From the coredump of the guest this is the call trace that calls
+>
+>> aio_get_linux_aio:
+>
+>>
+>
+>>
+>
+>> Stack trace of thread 145158:
+>
+>> #0  0x000003ff94dbe274 raise (libc.so.6)
+>
+>> #1  0x000003ff94da39a8 abort (libc.so.6)
+>
+>> #2  0x000003ff94db62ce __assert_fail_base (libc.so.6)
+>
+>> #3  0x000003ff94db634c __assert_fail (libc.so.6)
+>
+>> #4  0x000002aa20db067a aio_get_linux_aio (qemu-system-s390x)
+>
+>> #5  0x000002aa20d229a8 raw_aio_plug (qemu-system-s390x)
+>
+>> #6  0x000002aa20d309ee bdrv_io_plug (qemu-system-s390x)
+>
+>> #7  0x000002aa20b5a8ea virtio_blk_handle_vq (qemu-system-s390x)
+>
+>> #8  0x000002aa20db2f6e aio_dispatch_handlers (qemu-system-s390x)
+>
+>> #9  0x000002aa20db3c34 aio_poll (qemu-system-s390x)
+>
+>> #10 0x000002aa20be32a2 iothread_run (qemu-system-s390x)
+>
+>> #11 0x000003ff94f879a8 start_thread (libpthread.so.0)
+>
+>> #12 0x000003ff94e797ee thread_start (libc.so.6)
+>
+>>
+>
+>>
+>
+>> Thanks for taking a look and responding.
+>
+>>
+>
+>> Thanks
+>
+>> Farhan
+>
+>>
+>
+>>
+>
+>>
+>
+>
+>
+> Trying to debug a little further, the block device in this case is a "host
+>
+> device". And looking at your commit carefully you use the
+>
+> bdrv_attach_aio_context callback to setup a Linux AioContext.
+>
+>
+>
+> For some reason the "host device" struct (BlockDriver bdrv_host_device in
+>
+> block/file-posix.c) does not have a bdrv_attach_aio_context defined.
+>
+> So a simple change of adding the callback to the struct solves the issue and
+>
+> the guest starts fine.
+>
+>
+>
+>
+>
+> diff --git a/block/file-posix.c b/block/file-posix.c
+>
+> index 28824aa..b8d59fb 100644
+>
+> --- a/block/file-posix.c
+>
+> +++ b/block/file-posix.c
+>
+> @@ -3135,6 +3135,7 @@ static BlockDriver bdrv_host_device = {
+>
+>      .bdrv_refresh_limits = raw_refresh_limits,
+>
+>      .bdrv_io_plug = raw_aio_plug,
+>
+>      .bdrv_io_unplug = raw_aio_unplug,
+>
+> +    .bdrv_attach_aio_context = raw_aio_attach_aio_context,
+>
+>
+>
+>      .bdrv_co_truncate       = raw_co_truncate,
+>
+>      .bdrv_getlength    = raw_getlength,
+>
+>
+>
+>
+>
+>
+>
+> I am not too familiar with block device code in QEMU, so not sure if
+>
+> this is the right fix or if there are some underlying problems.
+>
+>
+Oh this is quite embarassing! I only added the bdrv_attach_aio_context
+>
+callback for the file-backed device. Your fix is definitely corect for
+>
+host device. Let me make sure there weren't any others missed and I will
+>
+send out a properly formatted patch. Thank you for the quick testing and
+>
+turnaround!
+Farhan, can you respin your patch with proper sign-off and patch description?
+Adding qemu-block.
+
+Hi Christian,
+
+On 19.07.2018 [08:55:20 +0200], Christian Borntraeger wrote:
+>
+>
+>
+On 07/18/2018 08:52 PM, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
+>
+> On 18.07.2018 [11:10:27 -0400], Farhan Ali wrote:
+>
+>>
+>
+>>
+>
+>> On 07/18/2018 09:42 AM, Farhan Ali wrote:
+<snip>
+
+>
+>> I am not too familiar with block device code in QEMU, so not sure if
+>
+>> this is the right fix or if there are some underlying problems.
+>
+>
+>
+> Oh this is quite embarassing! I only added the bdrv_attach_aio_context
+>
+> callback for the file-backed device. Your fix is definitely corect for
+>
+> host device. Let me make sure there weren't any others missed and I will
+>
+> send out a properly formatted patch. Thank you for the quick testing and
+>
+> turnaround!
+>
+>
+Farhan, can you respin your patch with proper sign-off and patch description?
+>
+Adding qemu-block.
+I sent it yesterday, sorry I didn't cc everyone from this e-mail:
+http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-block/2018-07/msg00516.html
+Thanks,
+Nish
+
diff --git a/results/classifier/014/user-level/28596630 b/results/classifier/014/user-level/28596630
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..aad764f5e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/results/classifier/014/user-level/28596630
@@ -0,0 +1,140 @@
+user-level: 0.856
+operating system: 0.853
+register: 0.839
+device: 0.835
+architecture: 0.818
+semantic: 0.814
+mistranslation: 0.813
+peripherals: 0.802
+ppc: 0.799
+performance: 0.797
+permissions: 0.791
+graphic: 0.785
+network: 0.780
+hypervisor: 0.775
+kernel: 0.770
+arm: 0.756
+PID: 0.750
+virtual: 0.742
+assembly: 0.725
+debug: 0.704
+risc-v: 0.702
+socket: 0.697
+vnc: 0.674
+TCG: 0.668
+x86: 0.654
+VMM: 0.650
+KVM: 0.649
+files: 0.630
+alpha: 0.624
+i386: 0.611
+boot: 0.609
+
+[Qemu-devel] [BUG] [low severity] a strange appearance of message involving slirp while doing "empty" make
+
+Folks,
+
+If qemu tree is already fully built, and "make" is attempted, for 3.1, the 
+outcome is:
+
+$ make
+        CHK version_gen.h
+$
+
+For 4.0-rc0, the outcome seems to be different:
+
+$ make
+make[1]: Entering directory '/home/build/malta-mips64r6/qemu-4.0/slirp'
+make[1]: Nothing to be done for 'all'.
+make[1]: Leaving directory '/home/build/malta-mips64r6/qemu-4.0/slirp'
+        CHK version_gen.h
+$
+
+Not sure how significant is that, but I report it just in case.
+
+Yours,
+Aleksandar
+
+On 20/03/2019 22.08, Aleksandar Markovic wrote:
+>
+Folks,
+>
+>
+If qemu tree is already fully built, and "make" is attempted, for 3.1, the
+>
+outcome is:
+>
+>
+$ make
+>
+CHK version_gen.h
+>
+$
+>
+>
+For 4.0-rc0, the outcome seems to be different:
+>
+>
+$ make
+>
+make[1]: Entering directory '/home/build/malta-mips64r6/qemu-4.0/slirp'
+>
+make[1]: Nothing to be done for 'all'.
+>
+make[1]: Leaving directory '/home/build/malta-mips64r6/qemu-4.0/slirp'
+>
+CHK version_gen.h
+>
+$
+>
+>
+Not sure how significant is that, but I report it just in case.
+It's likely because slirp is currently being reworked to become a
+separate project, so the makefiles have been changed a little bit. I
+guess the message will go away again once slirp has become a stand-alone
+library.
+
+ Thomas
+
+On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 at 04:59, Thomas Huth <address@hidden> wrote:
+>
+On 20/03/2019 22.08, Aleksandar Markovic wrote:
+>
+> $ make
+>
+> make[1]: Entering directory '/home/build/malta-mips64r6/qemu-4.0/slirp'
+>
+> make[1]: Nothing to be done for 'all'.
+>
+> make[1]: Leaving directory '/home/build/malta-mips64r6/qemu-4.0/slirp'
+>
+>       CHK version_gen.h
+>
+> $
+>
+>
+>
+> Not sure how significant is that, but I report it just in case.
+>
+>
+It's likely because slirp is currently being reworked to become a
+>
+separate project, so the makefiles have been changed a little bit. I
+>
+guess the message will go away again once slirp has become a stand-alone
+>
+library.
+Well, we'll still need to ship slirp for the foreseeable future...
+
+I think the cause of this is that the rule in Makefile for
+calling the slirp Makefile is not passing it $(SUBDIR_MAKEFLAGS)
+like all the other recursive make invocations. If we do that
+then we'll suppress the entering/leaving messages for
+non-verbose builds. (Some tweaking will be needed as
+it looks like the slirp makefile has picked an incompatible
+meaning for $BUILD_DIR, which the SUBDIR_MAKEFLAGS will
+also be passing to it.)
+
+thanks
+-- PMM
+
diff --git a/results/classifier/014/user-level/80615920 b/results/classifier/014/user-level/80615920
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..219084c13
--- /dev/null
+++ b/results/classifier/014/user-level/80615920
@@ -0,0 +1,375 @@
+user-level: 0.849
+risc-v: 0.809
+KVM: 0.803
+mistranslation: 0.800
+TCG: 0.785
+x86: 0.779
+operating system: 0.777
+peripherals: 0.777
+i386: 0.773
+vnc: 0.768
+ppc: 0.768
+hypervisor: 0.764
+VMM: 0.759
+performance: 0.758
+permissions: 0.758
+register: 0.756
+architecture: 0.755
+files: 0.751
+boot: 0.750
+virtual: 0.749
+device: 0.748
+assembly: 0.747
+debug: 0.746
+arm: 0.744
+kernel: 0.738
+semantic: 0.737
+network: 0.732
+socket: 0.732
+graphic: 0.730
+PID: 0.727
+alpha: 0.726
+
+[BUG] accel/tcg: cpu_exec_longjmp_cleanup: assertion failed: (cpu == current_cpu)
+
+It seems there is a bug in SIGALRM handling when 486 system emulates x86_64 
+code.
+
+This code: 
+
+#include <stdio.h>
+#include <stdlib.h>
+#include <pthread.h>
+#include <signal.h>
+#include <unistd.h>
+
+pthread_t thread1, thread2;
+
+// Signal handler for SIGALRM
+void alarm_handler(int sig) {
+    // Do nothing, just wake up the other thread
+}
+
+// Thread 1 function
+void* thread1_func(void* arg) {
+    // Set up the signal handler for SIGALRM
+    signal(SIGALRM, alarm_handler);
+
+    // Wait for 5 seconds
+    sleep(1);
+
+    // Send SIGALRM signal to thread 2
+    pthread_kill(thread2, SIGALRM);
+
+    return NULL;
+}
+
+// Thread 2 function
+void* thread2_func(void* arg) {
+    // Wait for the SIGALRM signal
+    pause();
+
+    printf("Thread 2 woke up!\n");
+
+    return NULL;
+}
+
+int main() {
+    // Create thread 1
+    if (pthread_create(&thread1, NULL, thread1_func, NULL) != 0) {
+        fprintf(stderr, "Failed to create thread 1\n");
+        return 1;
+    }
+
+    // Create thread 2
+    if (pthread_create(&thread2, NULL, thread2_func, NULL) != 0) {
+        fprintf(stderr, "Failed to create thread 2\n");
+        return 1;
+    }
+
+    // Wait for both threads to finish
+    pthread_join(thread1, NULL);
+    pthread_join(thread2, NULL);
+
+    return 0;
+}
+
+
+Fails with this -strace log (there are also unsupported syscalls 334 and 435, 
+but it seems it doesn't affect the code much):
+
+...
+736 rt_sigaction(SIGALRM,0x000000001123ec20,0x000000001123ecc0) = 0
+736 clock_nanosleep(CLOCK_REALTIME,0,{tv_sec = 1,tv_nsec = 0},{tv_sec = 
+1,tv_nsec = 0})
+736 rt_sigprocmask(SIG_BLOCK,0x00000000109fad20,0x0000000010800b38,8) = 0
+736 Unknown syscall 435
+736 
+clone(CLONE_VM|CLONE_FS|CLONE_FILES|CLONE_SIGHAND|CLONE_THREAD|CLONE_SYSVSEM|CLONE_SETTLS|CLONE_PARENT_SETTID|
+ ...
+736 rt_sigprocmask(SIG_SETMASK,0x0000000010800b38,NULL,8)
+736 set_robust_list(0x11a419a0,0) = -1 errno=38 (Function not implemented)
+736 rt_sigprocmask(SIG_SETMASK,0x0000000011a41fb0,NULL,8) = 0
+ = 0
+736 pause(0,0,2,277186368,0,295966400)
+736 
+futex(0x000000001123f990,FUTEX_CLOCK_REALTIME|FUTEX_WAIT_BITSET,738,NULL,NULL,0)
+ = 0
+736 rt_sigprocmask(SIG_BLOCK,0x00000000109fad20,0x000000001123ee88,8) = 0
+736 getpid() = 736
+736 tgkill(736,739,SIGALRM) = 0
+ = -1 errno=4 (Interrupted system call)
+--- SIGALRM {si_signo=SIGALRM, si_code=SI_TKILL, si_pid=736, si_uid=0} ---
+0x48874a != 0x3c69e10
+736 rt_sigprocmask(SIG_SETMASK,0x000000001123ee88,NULL,8) = 0
+**
+ERROR:../accel/tcg/cpu-exec.c:546:cpu_exec_longjmp_cleanup: assertion failed: 
+(cpu == current_cpu)
+Bail out! ERROR:../accel/tcg/cpu-exec.c:546:cpu_exec_longjmp_cleanup: assertion 
+failed: (cpu == current_cpu)
+0x48874a != 0x3c69e10
+**
+ERROR:../accel/tcg/cpu-exec.c:546:cpu_exec_longjmp_cleanup: assertion failed: 
+(cpu == current_cpu)
+Bail out! ERROR:../accel/tcg/cpu-exec.c:546:cpu_exec_longjmp_cleanup: assertion 
+failed: (cpu == current_cpu)
+# 
+
+The code fails either with or without -singlestep, the command line:
+
+/usr/bin/qemu-x86_64 -L /opt/x86_64 -strace -singlestep  /opt/x86_64/alarm.bin
+
+Source code of QEMU 8.1.1 was modified with patch "[PATCH] qemu/timer: Don't 
+use RDTSC on i486" [1], 
+with added few ioctls (not relevant) and cpu_exec_longjmp_cleanup() now prints 
+current pointers of 
+cpu and current_cpu (line "0x48874a != 0x3c69e10").
+
+config.log (built as a part of buildroot, basically the minimal possible 
+configuration for running x86_64 on 486):
+
+# Configured with: 
+'/mnt/hd_8tb_p1/p1/home/crossgen/buildroot_486_2/output/build/qemu-8.1.1/configure'
+ '--prefix=/usr' 
+'--cross-prefix=/mnt/hd_8tb_p1/p1/home/crossgen/buildroot_486_2/output/host/bin/i486-buildroot-linux-gnu-'
+ '--audio-drv-list=' 
+'--python=/mnt/hd_8tb_p1/p1/home/crossgen/buildroot_486_2/output/host/bin/python3'
+ 
+'--ninja=/mnt/hd_8tb_p1/p1/home/crossgen/buildroot_486_2/output/host/bin/ninja' 
+'--disable-alsa' '--disable-bpf' '--disable-brlapi' '--disable-bsd-user' 
+'--disable-cap-ng' '--disable-capstone' '--disable-containers' 
+'--disable-coreaudio' '--disable-curl' '--disable-curses' 
+'--disable-dbus-display' '--disable-docs' '--disable-dsound' '--disable-hvf' 
+'--disable-jack' '--disable-libiscsi' '--disable-linux-aio' 
+'--disable-linux-io-uring' '--disable-malloc-trim' '--disable-membarrier' 
+'--disable-mpath' '--disable-netmap' '--disable-opengl' '--disable-oss' 
+'--disable-pa' '--disable-rbd' '--disable-sanitizers' '--disable-selinux' 
+'--disable-sparse' '--disable-strip' '--disable-vde' '--disable-vhost-crypto' 
+'--disable-vhost-user-blk-server' '--disable-virtfs' '--disable-whpx' 
+'--disable-xen' '--disable-attr' '--disable-kvm' '--disable-vhost-net' 
+'--disable-download' '--disable-hexagon-idef-parser' '--disable-system' 
+'--enable-linux-user' '--target-list=x86_64-linux-user' '--disable-vhost-user' 
+'--disable-slirp' '--disable-sdl' '--disable-fdt' '--enable-trace-backends=nop' 
+'--disable-tools' '--disable-guest-agent' '--disable-fuse' 
+'--disable-fuse-lseek' '--disable-seccomp' '--disable-libssh' 
+'--disable-libusb' '--disable-vnc' '--disable-nettle' '--disable-numa' 
+'--disable-pipewire' '--disable-spice' '--disable-usb-redir' 
+'--disable-install-blobs'
+
+Emulation of the same x86_64 code with qemu 6.2.0 installed on another x86_64 
+native machine works fine.
+
+[1]
+https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2023-11/msg05387.html
+Best regards,
+Petr
+
+On Sat, 25 Nov 2023 at 13:09, Petr Cvek <petrcvekcz@gmail.com> wrote:
+>
+>
+It seems there is a bug in SIGALRM handling when 486 system emulates x86_64
+>
+code.
+486 host is pretty well out of support currently. Can you reproduce
+this on a less ancient host CPU type ?
+
+>
+ERROR:../accel/tcg/cpu-exec.c:546:cpu_exec_longjmp_cleanup: assertion failed:
+>
+(cpu == current_cpu)
+>
+Bail out! ERROR:../accel/tcg/cpu-exec.c:546:cpu_exec_longjmp_cleanup:
+>
+assertion failed: (cpu == current_cpu)
+>
+0x48874a != 0x3c69e10
+>
+**
+>
+ERROR:../accel/tcg/cpu-exec.c:546:cpu_exec_longjmp_cleanup: assertion failed:
+>
+(cpu == current_cpu)
+>
+Bail out! ERROR:../accel/tcg/cpu-exec.c:546:cpu_exec_longjmp_cleanup:
+>
+assertion failed: (cpu == current_cpu)
+What compiler version do you build QEMU with? That
+assert is there because we have seen some buggy compilers
+in the past which don't correctly preserve the variable
+value as the setjmp/longjmp spec requires them to.
+
+thanks
+-- PMM
+
+Dne 27. 11. 23 v 10:37 Peter Maydell napsal(a):
+>
+On Sat, 25 Nov 2023 at 13:09, Petr Cvek <petrcvekcz@gmail.com> wrote:
+>
+>
+>
+> It seems there is a bug in SIGALRM handling when 486 system emulates x86_64
+>
+> code.
+>
+>
+486 host is pretty well out of support currently. Can you reproduce
+>
+this on a less ancient host CPU type ?
+>
+It seems it only fails when the code is compiled for i486. QEMU built with the 
+same compiler with -march=i586 and above runs on the same physical hardware 
+without a problem. All -march= variants were executed on ryzen 3600.
+
+>
+> ERROR:../accel/tcg/cpu-exec.c:546:cpu_exec_longjmp_cleanup: assertion
+>
+> failed: (cpu == current_cpu)
+>
+> Bail out! ERROR:../accel/tcg/cpu-exec.c:546:cpu_exec_longjmp_cleanup:
+>
+> assertion failed: (cpu == current_cpu)
+>
+> 0x48874a != 0x3c69e10
+>
+> **
+>
+> ERROR:../accel/tcg/cpu-exec.c:546:cpu_exec_longjmp_cleanup: assertion
+>
+> failed: (cpu == current_cpu)
+>
+> Bail out! ERROR:../accel/tcg/cpu-exec.c:546:cpu_exec_longjmp_cleanup:
+>
+> assertion failed: (cpu == current_cpu)
+>
+>
+What compiler version do you build QEMU with? That
+>
+assert is there because we have seen some buggy compilers
+>
+in the past which don't correctly preserve the variable
+>
+value as the setjmp/longjmp spec requires them to.
+>
+i486 and i586+ code variants were compiled with GCC 13.2.0 (more exactly, 
+slackware64 current multilib distribution).
+
+i486 binary which runs on the real 486 is also GCC 13.2.0 and installed as a 
+part of the buildroot crosscompiler (about two week old git snapshot).
+
+>
+thanks
+>
+-- PMM
+best regards,
+Petr
+
+On 11/25/23 07:08, Petr Cvek wrote:
+ERROR:../accel/tcg/cpu-exec.c:546:cpu_exec_longjmp_cleanup: assertion failed: 
+(cpu == current_cpu)
+Bail out! ERROR:../accel/tcg/cpu-exec.c:546:cpu_exec_longjmp_cleanup: assertion 
+failed: (cpu == current_cpu)
+#
+
+The code fails either with or without -singlestep, the command line:
+
+/usr/bin/qemu-x86_64 -L /opt/x86_64 -strace -singlestep  /opt/x86_64/alarm.bin
+
+Source code of QEMU 8.1.1 was modified with patch "[PATCH] qemu/timer: Don't use 
+RDTSC on i486" [1],
+with added few ioctls (not relevant) and cpu_exec_longjmp_cleanup() now prints 
+current pointers of
+cpu and current_cpu (line "0x48874a != 0x3c69e10").
+If you try this again with 8.2-rc2, you should not see an assertion failure.
+You should see instead
+
+QEMU internal SIGILL {code=ILLOPC, addr=0x12345678}
+which I think more accurately summarizes the situation of attempting RDTSC on hardware
+that does not support it.
+r~
+
+Dne 29. 11. 23 v 15:25 Richard Henderson napsal(a):
+>
+On 11/25/23 07:08, Petr Cvek wrote:
+>
+> ERROR:../accel/tcg/cpu-exec.c:546:cpu_exec_longjmp_cleanup: assertion
+>
+> failed: (cpu == current_cpu)
+>
+> Bail out! ERROR:../accel/tcg/cpu-exec.c:546:cpu_exec_longjmp_cleanup:
+>
+> assertion failed: (cpu == current_cpu)
+>
+> #
+>
+>
+>
+> The code fails either with or without -singlestep, the command line:
+>
+>
+>
+> /usr/bin/qemu-x86_64 -L /opt/x86_64 -strace -singlestepÂ
+>
+> /opt/x86_64/alarm.bin
+>
+>
+>
+> Source code of QEMU 8.1.1 was modified with patch "[PATCH] qemu/timer: Don't
+>
+> use RDTSC on i486" [1],
+>
+> with added few ioctls (not relevant) and cpu_exec_longjmp_cleanup() now
+>
+> prints current pointers of
+>
+> cpu and current_cpu (line "0x48874a != 0x3c69e10").
+>
+>
+>
+If you try this again with 8.2-rc2, you should not see an assertion failure.
+>
+You should see instead
+>
+>
+QEMU internal SIGILL {code=ILLOPC, addr=0x12345678}
+>
+>
+which I think more accurately summarizes the situation of attempting RDTSC on
+>
+hardware that does not support it.
+>
+>
+Compilation of vanilla qemu v8.2.0-rc2 with -march=i486 by GCC 13.2.0 and 
+running the resulting binary on ryzen still leads to:
+
+**
+ERROR:../accel/tcg/cpu-exec.c:533:cpu_exec_longjmp_cleanup: assertion failed: 
+(cpu == current_cpu)
+Bail out! ERROR:../accel/tcg/cpu-exec.c:533:cpu_exec_longjmp_cleanup: assertion 
+failed: (cpu == current_cpu)
+Aborted
+
+>
+>
+r~
+Petr
+