Hi, On 2022-08-15 12:50:52 -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Mon, Aug 15, 2022 at 09:45:03AM -0700, Andres Freund wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On 2022-08-15 11:40:59 -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > OK so this gives us a quick revert as a solution for now. > > > Next, I would appreciate it if you just try this simple hack. > > > If it crashes we either have a long standing problem in virtio > > > code or more likely a gcp bug where it can't handle smaller > > > rings than what device requestes. > > > Thanks! > > > > I applied the below and the problem persists. > > > > [...] > > Okay! Just checking - I applied and tested this atop 6.0-rc1, correct? Or did you want me to test it with the 762faee5a267 reverted? I guess what you're trying to test if a smaller queue than what's requested you'd want to do so without the problematic patch applied... > And just to be 100% sure, can you try the following on top of 5.19: > diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio_pci_modern.c b/drivers/virtio/virtio_pci_modern.c > index 623906b4996c..6f4e54a618bc 100644 > --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio_pci_modern.c > +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio_pci_modern.c > @@ -208,6 +208,9 @@ static struct virtqueue *setup_vq(struct virtio_pci_device *vp_dev, > return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL); > } > > + if (num > 1024) > + num = 1024; > + > info->msix_vector = msix_vec; > > /* create the vring */ > > -- Either way, I did this, and there are no issues that I could observe. No oopses, no broken networking. But: To make sure it does something I added a debugging printk - which doesn't show up. I assume this is at a point at least earlyprintk should work (which I see getting enabled via serial)? Greetings, Andres Freund _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
