From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk Subject: Re: [xen-unstable test] 18851: regressions - FAIL [and 1 more messages] Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2013 08:49:48 -0400 Message-ID: <20130906124948.GB2590@phenom.dumpdata.com> References: <21028.43605.857256.880579@mariner.uk.xensource.com> <522713A602000078000F042D@nat28.tlf.novell.com> <21031.3663.29603.464865@mariner.uk.xensource.com> <522869E2.3040106@citrix.com> <5228934302000078000F0D15@nat28.tlf.novell.com> <52289094.7020204@citrix.com> <21033.45234.301594.983000@mariner.uk.xensource.com> <5229CF7702000078000F105E@nat28.tlf.novell.com> <21033.46910.561422.955843@mariner.uk.xensource.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail6.bemta5.messagelabs.com ([195.245.231.135]) by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1VHvU9-0004L9-4q for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Fri, 06 Sep 2013 12:50:01 +0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <21033.46910.561422.955843@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 , Stefano Stabellini Cc: Keir Fraser , David Vrabel , Jan Beulich , xen-devel , Boris Ostrovsky , Malcolm Crossley List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 12:06:38PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > Jan Beulich writes ("Re: [xen-unstable test] 18851: regressions - FAIL [and 1 more messages]"): > > On 06.09.13 at 12:38, Ian Jackson wrote: > > For -unstable this also resulted in just a single left test failure > > (test-amd64-i386-pair 17 guest-migrate/src_host/dst_host), > > which appears to be the result of the migration, after the > > first few thousand pages, seeing a rapid decrease of speed > > (which then likely causes that timeout). I couldn't spot anything > > in the logs that would explain this though. But I did notice that > > in two of the three runs there was not xend.log captured on > > the source host in the first place - is there an explanation for > > this? > > Looking at the logs-capture log, it appears that itch-mite was totally > unresponsive by then. The log capture script decided to power cycle > it. After having done that, xend wasn't running. Due to a bug in the > script it didn't retry the log capture. > > > In any event I'm going to take these almost-pushes as a > > "good enough" sign to pull over the two or three commits into > > the stable branches, in the expectation that we should be > > able to get a push there over the weekend, and then release > > early next week. > > OK. > > > Looking through the logs of *-mite it also seems like you gave > > 3.11 a try, hitting a BUG() in balloon.c. > > That'll be the "linux-linus" test, which isn't doing very well. I think Boris has a patch for that fixes the regression. > > Ian.