From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Julien Grall Subject: Re: [xen-unstable test] 53884: regressions - FAIL Date: Mon, 11 May 2015 10:38:02 +0100 Message-ID: <5550787A.6030603@citrix.com> References: <55507FB50200007800078C01@mail.emea.novell.com> <5550646D.1010502@citrix.com> <555082200200007800078C1C@mail.emea.novell.com> <555085480200007800078C30@mail.emea.novell.com> <1431335126.2660.571.camel@citrix.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 1YrkAW-0004mH-BY for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Mon, 11 May 2015 09:38:36 +0000 In-Reply-To: <1431335126.2660.571.camel@citrix.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 Campbell , Jan Beulich Cc: Andrew Cooper , Julien Grall , ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com, Roger Pau Monne , xen-devel List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Hi, On 11/05/15 10:05, Ian Campbell wrote: > On Mon, 2015-05-11 at 09:32 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> While it'd be really nice to do so, the flight here didn't test the tip of >>> staging (onto which I'll push the revert in a few minutes), so a force >>> push may be a little difficult to arrange. I'm also afraid that doing so >>> would yield the XSM build failure an allowable one going forward. >>> Otoh, considering that we got two almost-pushes recently, I'm quite >>> hopeful that we'll get a real push pretty soon. >> >> And sadly 6ea9f0481e ("xen: guestcopy: Provide an helper to >> safely copy string from guest") breaks the x86 XSM build too (due >> to type issues with the compat mode layer of flask's hypercall >> handling). Reverting that one would be more cumbersome (as I >> suppose subsequent changes depend on it), but I very much >> hope that you, Julien, will provide a timely fix for this. > > Yes, please. > > There's no point my killing 55228 until then. > > Perhaps I should enable XSM for my precommit build test, I don't want to > do both (life's too short) but building XSM is more likely to be > forgotten by contributors I think. Sorry for the breakage, I did test XSM but only with ARM build but I forgot to do it for x86. I will send a fix today. Regards, -- Julien Grall