From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ian Campbell Subject: Re: [OSSTEST PATCH 23/27] make-flight: Provide xen-unstable-smoke branch Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 16:09:13 +0100 Message-ID: <1442416153.18856.114.camel@citrix.com> References: <1442410530-9665-1-git-send-email-ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com> <1442410530-9665-24-git-send-email-ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com> <1442413735.18856.97.camel@citrix.com> <22009.33294.109492.791489@mariner.uk.xensource.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail6.bemta3.messagelabs.com ([195.245.230.39]) by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1ZcEKj-0006Al-Cw for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Wed, 16 Sep 2015 15:09:17 +0000 In-Reply-To: <22009.33294.109492.791489@mariner.uk.xensource.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Ian Jackson Cc: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Wed, 2015-09-16 at 15:51 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > Ian Campbell writes ("Re: [OSSTEST PATCH 23/27] make-flight: Provide xen > -unstable-smoke branch"): > > On Wed, 2015-09-16 at 14:35 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > > > This contains a very limited set of jobs: > > > build-amd64 > > > build-armhf > > > test-amd64-amd64-libvirt > > > test-amd64-amd64-xl-qemuu-debianhvm-i386 > > > test-armhf-armhf-xl > > > > > > The debianhvm job exists only in this flight, and is generated by > > > having branch_debianhvm_arch return i386 instead of amd64. > > > > any particular reason for this? > > I wanted to test at least one 32-bit guest. I have added a note about > this to the commit message. OK. I wonder if we should also add this to the regular flights? Seems odd to smoke test it for unstable but not for e.g. real 4.6 flights. > > > Deployment note: This requires images/debian-7.2.0-i386-CD-1.iso > > > which I have already downloaded to the Cambridge instance using > > > jigdo. > > > > But not the main colo? > > Not yet. I will do that before I start trying to run this there. I > think I ought to do such a --real run, by hand, when the series seems > about ready to go into pretest. > > > > +case "$branch" in > > > +xen-unstable-smoke) > > > + global_runvars+=" hostalloc_maxbonus_variation~=0 " > > > + global_runvars+=" hostalloc_bonus_previousfail~=0 " > > > > Why are these synthetic? > > I wrote in the commit message that introduced the ~ notation in > cs-job-create: > > This will be useful if we want to set hostalloc_* runvars. Normally > we would want to set those only on flights generated by make-flight. > > Flights generated by cs-bisection-step or cs-adjust-flight ought not > to copy them, because cs-bisection-step makes its own arrangements > for > host specification, as should the caller of cs-adjust-flight (perhaps > via the blessing system). > > Using `synth' for this is arguably slightly wrong but it does the > right thing in all existing cases. The alternative would be a schema > change. > > Perhaps I should move some of this text to this commit message. Yes, I'd forgotten all about it by now, which I think it is when it is relevant. > > Ian.