From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [xen-unstable test] 65141: regressions - FAIL
Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 10:57:35 +0000
Message-ID: <565ECE9F.6030609@citrix.com>
References: <osstest-65141-mainreport@xen.org>
	<22104.31917.532615.949661@mariner.uk.xensource.com>
	<9E79D1C9A97CFD4097BCE431828FDD31023BAE97@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com>
	<1449052492.4424.30.camel@citrix.com>
	<565EDB7802000078000BB2E0@prv-mh.provo.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>
In-Reply-To: <565EDB7802000078000BB2E0@prv-mh.provo.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>, Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>, Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com>
Cc: Robert Hu <robert.hu@intel.com>, KevinTian <kevin.tian@intel.com>, "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>, osstestservice owner <osstest-admin@xenproject.org>, Jun Nakajima <jun.nakajima@intel.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 02/12/15 10:52, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 02.12.15 at 11:34, <ian.campbell@citrix.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 2015-11-30 at 05:35 +0000, Hu, Robert wrote:
>>
>> Also adding Vt-x maintainers (Kevin and Jun) for their help/input, I'm not
>> sure if there is a dedicated nested-vmx maintainer. This failure has been
>> blocking the xen-unstable push gate for a week now so it really does need
>> looking into.
>>
>> Also CC the arch X86 maintainers, for-their-info.
> I was actually waiting for the bisector to point at something. Also
> looking at the history this might be machine specific (the sole
> initial pass was on italia0, all failures are on godello1). Should new
> tests perhaps be capable of causing regressions only once they
> passed on every host they may (usefully) run on?

As a general improvement, OSSTest should not make new tests blocking by
default.  They should need to be proved stable (5 consecutive passes?)
before they become blocking, to prevent a new test spuriously passing
and subsequently blocking pushes.

During this time, the author of the new test has the onus to ensure test
stability; either modifications to the test, or bugfixes to master.

~Andrew