From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Cooper Subject: Re: [xen-unstable test] 65066: regressions - FAIL Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 09:43:15 +0000 Message-ID: <565582B3.1060307@citrix.com> References: <1448444036.17688.7.camel@citrix.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1448444036.17688.7.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 , Ian.Jackson@citrix.com, wei.liu2@citrix.com Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, osstest service owner List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 25/11/15 09:33, Ian Campbell wrote: > On Wed, 2015-11-25 at 02:30 +0000, osstest service owner wrote: >> flight 65066 xen-unstable real [real] >> http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/65066/ >> >> Regressions :-( >> >> Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, >> including tests which could not be run: >> test-amd64-i386-rumpuserxen-i386 10 guest-start fail REGR. vs. 64035 > We discussed this possibility IRL when the "minios: don't rely on specific > page table allocation scheme" fix was being made for the issue exposed by > the changes to the domain builder to support larger guests. > > The rumpkernel flights have been disabled for a while now pending a > reworking of osstest to cope with an upstream change to the build system, > so there is no possibility, at the moment, of getting the mini-os fix into > upstream rump and then through our rumpkernel push gate and into the xen- > unstable tests. > > Therefore I believe we concluded we would force push this failure. > > But before I did so I just wanted to confirm I'd understood the plan. +1 force push. Master is a long way behind staging currently, and this doesn't look like it is going to be fixed any time soon. ~Andrew