From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [xen-unstable test] 57852: regressions - FAIL
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2015 12:01:27 +0100
Message-ID: <1433934087.30003.32.camel@citrix.com>
References: <osstest-57852-mainreport@xen.org>
	<1433493915.7108.138.camel@citrix.com>
	<5571814C02000078000812F1@mail.emea.novell.com>
	<1433495266.7108.145.camel@citrix.com>
	<5571858C020000780008132E@mail.emea.novell.com>
	<1433501300.7108.208.camel@citrix.com>
	<557569610200007800081D4C@mail.emea.novell.com>
	<1433753590.7108.392.camel@citrix.com>
	<557579500200007800081DF0@mail.emea.novell.com>
	<1433755652.7108.405.camel@citrix.com>
	<1433765763.7108.482.camel@citrix.com>
	<1433838390.7108.523.camel@citrix.com>
	<5576CE2602000078000827F6@mail.emea.novell.com>
	<1433926213.30003.2.camel@citrix.com>
	<557821330200007800082F1C@mail.emea.novell.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
Received: from mail6.bemta5.messagelabs.com ([195.245.231.135])
	by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <prvs=596f3e333=Ian.Campbell@citrix.com>)
	id 1Z2dlH-0006dk-AK
	for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Wed, 10 Jun 2015 11:01:35 +0000
In-Reply-To: <557821330200007800082F1C@mail.emea.novell.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: Andrew Cooper <Andrew.Cooper3@citrix.com>, ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com, xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On Wed, 2015-06-10 at 10:36 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> Indeed. Leaving us with the slight hope that there is a microcode
> update available that's newer than what the BIOS of those boxes
> loads. Could we perhaps afford un-blessing the two systems for
> the time being? And maybe get Intel involved if there's no ucode
> update available that helps?

Arranging to do microcode updates looks like it is going to be a bit
non-trivial from the osstest side. Is there any reason to think it would
help other than just hoping it will?

Can't we get Intel involved right away?

Ian.