Re: virtio_balloon regression in 5.19-rc3
[TLDR: I'm adding this regression report to the list of tracked
regressions; all text from me you find below is based on a few templates
paragraphs you might have encountered already already in similar form.]
On 20.06.22 20:49, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> I've tested a 5.19-rc3 kernel on top of QEMU/KVM with machine type
> pc-q35-5.2. It has a virtio balloon device defined in libvirt as:
>
> <memballoon model="virtio">
> <address type="pci" domain="0x0000" bus="0x05" slot="0x00" function="0x0"/>
> </memballoon>
>
> but the virtio_balloon driver fails to bind to it:
>
> virtio_balloon virtio4: init_vqs: add stat_vq failed
> virtio_balloon: probe of virtio4 failed with error -5
>
> On a 5.18 kernel with similar configuration, it binds successfully.
>
> I've attached the kernel config for 5.19-rc3.
CCing the regression mailing list, as it should be in the loop for all
regressions, as explained here:
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/admin-guide/reporting-issues.html
Thanks for the report. To be sure below issue doesn't fall through the
cracks unnoticed, I'm adding it to regzbot, my Linux kernel regression
tracking bot:
#regzbot ^introduced v5.18..v5.19-rc3
#regzbot ignore-activity
This isn't a regression? This issue or a fix for it are already
discussed somewhere else? It was fixed already? You want to clarify when
the regression started to happen? Or point out I got the title or
something else totally wrong? Then just reply -- ideally with also
telling regzbot about it, as explained here:
https://linux-regtracking.leemhuis.info/tracked-regression/
Reminder for developers: When fixing the issue, add 'Link:' tags
pointing to the report (the mail this one replies to), as explained for
in the Linux kernel's documentation; above webpage explains why this is
important for tracked regressions.
Ciao, Thorsten (wearing his 'the Linux kernel's regression tracker' hat)
P.S.: As the Linux kernel's regression tracker I deal with a lot of
reports and sometimes miss something important when writing mails like
this. If that's the case here, don't hesitate to tell me in a public
reply, it's in everyone's interest to set the public record straight.
Reply to: