From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jim Fehlig Subject: Re: [osstest test] 64958: regressions - trouble: broken/fail/pass Date: Wed, 02 Dec 2015 18:33:14 -0700 Message-ID: <565F9BDA.3030509@suse.com> References: <1448462229.17688.114.camel@citrix.com> <1448465532.17688.122.camel@citrix.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1448465532.17688.122.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 , xen-devel@lists.xen.org Cc: osstest service owner List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 11/25/2015 08:32 AM, Ian Campbell wrote: > On Wed, 2015-11-25 at 14:37 +0000, Ian Campbell wrote: >> 2015-11-21 23:06:44 Z executing ssh ... root@172.16.144.44 virsh domxml-from-native xen-xl /etc/xen/debian.jessie.guest.osstest.cfg > /etc/xen/debian.jessie.guest.osstest.cfg.xml >> error: An error occurred, but the cause is unknown > This turned out to be the check of vcpus vs MAX_VIRT_CPUS in > xenParseCPUFeatures. > > MAX_VIRT_CPUS is defined (by libvirt) as XEN_LEGACY_MAX_VCPUS, which is > mostly wrong on x86 (which supports more than that for guests using vcpu > placement) but is very wrong on ARM where we insist on vcpu placement and > XEN_LEGACY_MAX_VCPUS is therefore 1. > > This test was trying to create a 2 cpu guest. > > Since this check is in xen_common.c I think it might take a little > unravelling to fix this, since it seems to have lead to various other > assumptions to do with CPU masks fitting into an unsigned long in the > libvirt code base. Hi Ian, Sorry for the delay. I'm still catching up on mail after some days away. > /me rolls up sleeves. I see that your toiling has produced some patches. I'm slowly making it through patch reviews too, and will get to those soon. Regards, Jim