* [qemu-upstream-unstable test] 24553: tolerable FAIL - PUSHED
@ 2014-01-28 2:16 xen.org
2014-01-28 9:37 ` Ian Campbell
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: xen.org @ 2014-01-28 2:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: xen-devel; +Cc: ian.jackson
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 12021 bytes --]
flight 24553 qemu-upstream-unstable real [real]
http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~xensrcts/logs/24553/
Failures :-/ but no regressions.
Regressions which are regarded as allowable (not blocking):
test-amd64-i386-xl-qemuu-winxpsp3-vcpus1 7 windows-install fail like 22066
test-amd64-i386-xl-qemuu-win7-amd64 7 windows-install fail like 22089
Tests which did not succeed, but are not blocking:
test-amd64-amd64-xl-qemuu-winxpsp3 13 guest-stop fail never pass
test-amd64-amd64-xl-qemuu-win7-amd64 13 guest-stop fail never pass
test-amd64-i386-xend-qemuu-winxpsp3 16 leak-check/check fail never pass
version targeted for testing:
qemuu 11f6a1cedb8d759fd64d7dd5db95b747591f2ca7
baseline version:
qemuu b97307ecaad98360f41ea36cd9674ef810c4f8cf
------------------------------------------------------------
People who touched revisions under test:
Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>
Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@ozlabs.ru>
Amit Shah <amit.shah@redhat.com>
Amos Kong <akong@redhat.com>
Andreas Färber <afaerber@suse.de>
Anthony Liguori <aliguori@amazon.com>
Aurelien Jarno <aurelien@aurel32.net>
Bandan Das <bsd@redhat.com>
Cole Robinson <crobinso@redhat.com>
CongLi <coli@redhat.com>
Eduardo Otubo <otubo@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Fam Zheng <famz@redhat.com>
Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>
Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Igor Mammedov <imammedo@redhat.com>
James Hogan <james.hogan@imgtec.com> [mips]
Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>
Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@redhat.com>
Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
Matthew Daley <mattjd@gmail.com>
Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@gmail.com>
Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com>
Michael Roth <mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>
Michael Tokarev <mjt@tls.msk.ru>
Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Paul Moore <pmoore@redhat.com>
Petar Jovanovic <petar.jovanovic@imgtec.com>
Peter Lieven <pl@kamp.de>
Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>
Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>
Stefan Weil <sw@weilnetz.de>
Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>
Tomoki Sekiyama <tomoki.sekiyama@hds.com>
Vlad Yasevich <vyasevic@redhat.com>
Wenchao Xia <xiawenc@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
------------------------------------------------------------
jobs:
build-amd64-xend pass
build-i386-xend pass
build-amd64 pass
build-i386 pass
build-amd64-oldkern pass
build-i386-oldkern pass
build-amd64-pvops pass
build-i386-pvops pass
test-amd64-i386-qemuu-rhel6hvm-amd pass
test-amd64-amd64-xl-qemuu-win7-amd64 fail
test-amd64-i386-xl-qemuu-win7-amd64 fail
test-amd64-i386-qemuu-rhel6hvm-intel pass
test-amd64-i386-xl-qemuu-winxpsp3-vcpus1 fail
test-amd64-i386-xend-qemuu-winxpsp3 fail
test-amd64-amd64-xl-qemuu-winxpsp3 fail
------------------------------------------------------------
sg-report-flight on woking.cam.xci-test.com
logs: /home/xc_osstest/logs
images: /home/xc_osstest/images
Logs, config files, etc. are available at
http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~xensrcts/logs
Test harness code can be found at
http://xenbits.xensource.com/gitweb?p=osstest.git;a=summary
Pushing revision :
+ branch=qemu-upstream-unstable
+ revision=11f6a1cedb8d759fd64d7dd5db95b747591f2ca7
+ . cri-lock-repos
++ . cri-common
+++ . cri-getconfig
+++ umask 002
+++ getconfig Repos
+++ perl -e '
use Osstest;
readglobalconfig();
print $c{"Repos"} or die $!;
'
++ repos=/export/home/osstest/repos
++ repos_lock=/export/home/osstest/repos/lock
++ '[' x '!=' x/export/home/osstest/repos/lock ']'
++ OSSTEST_REPOS_LOCK_LOCKED=/export/home/osstest/repos/lock
++ exec with-lock-ex -w /export/home/osstest/repos/lock ./ap-push qemu-upstream-unstable 11f6a1cedb8d759fd64d7dd5db95b747591f2ca7
+ branch=qemu-upstream-unstable
+ revision=11f6a1cedb8d759fd64d7dd5db95b747591f2ca7
+ . cri-lock-repos
++ . cri-common
+++ . cri-getconfig
+++ umask 002
+++ getconfig Repos
+++ perl -e '
use Osstest;
readglobalconfig();
print $c{"Repos"} or die $!;
'
++ repos=/export/home/osstest/repos
++ repos_lock=/export/home/osstest/repos/lock
++ '[' x/export/home/osstest/repos/lock '!=' x/export/home/osstest/repos/lock ']'
+ . cri-common
++ . cri-getconfig
++ umask 002
+ select_xenbranch
+ case "$branch" in
+ tree=qemuu
+ xenbranch=xen-unstable
+ '[' xqemuu = xlinux ']'
+ linuxbranch=
+ : tested/2.6.39.x
+ . ap-common
++ : osstest@xenbits.xensource.com
++ : git://xenbits.xen.org/xen.git
++ : osstest@xenbits.xensource.com:/home/xen/git/xen.git
++ : git://xenbits.xen.org/staging/qemu-xen-unstable.git
++ : git://git.kernel.org
++ : git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git
++ : git
++ : git://xenbits.xen.org/osstest/linux-firmware.git
++ : osstest@xenbits.xensource.com:/home/osstest/ext/linux-firmware.git
++ : git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/firmware/linux-firmware.git
++ : osstest@xenbits.xensource.com:/home/xen/git/linux-pvops.git
++ : git://xenbits.xen.org/linux-pvops.git
++ : tested/linux-3.4
++ : tested/linux-arm-xen
++ '[' xgit://xenbits.xen.org/linux-pvops.git = x ']'
++ '[' x = x ']'
++ : git://xenbits.xen.org/linux-pvops.git
++ : tested/linux-arm-xen
++ : git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/konrad/xen.git
++ : tested/2.6.39.x
++ : daily-cron.qemu-upstream-unstable
++ : daily-cron.qemu-upstream-unstable
++ : http://hg.uk.xensource.com/carbon/trunk/linux-2.6.27
++ : git://xenbits.xen.org/staging/qemu-upstream-unstable.git
++ : daily-cron.qemu-upstream-unstable
+ TREE_LINUX=osstest@xenbits.xensource.com:/home/xen/git/linux-pvops.git
+ TREE_QEMU_UPSTREAM=osstest@xenbits.xensource.com:/home/xen/git/qemu-upstream-unstable.git
+ TREE_XEN=osstest@xenbits.xensource.com:/home/xen/git/xen.git
+ info_linux_tree qemu-upstream-unstable
+ case $1 in
+ return 1
+ case "$branch" in
+ cd /export/home/osstest/repos/qemu-upstream-unstable
+ git push osstest@xenbits.xensource.com:/home/xen/git/qemu-upstream-unstable.git 11f6a1cedb8d759fd64d7dd5db95b747591f2ca7:master
Counting objects: 253, done.
Compressing objects: 2% (1/44)
Compressing objects: 4% (2/44)
Compressing objects: 6% (3/44)
Compressing objects: 9% (4/44)
Compressing objects: 11% (5/44)
Compressing objects: 13% (6/44)
Compressing objects: 15% (7/44)
Compressing objects: 18% (8/44)
Compressing objects: 20% (9/44)
Compressing objects: 22% (10/44)
Compressing objects: 25% (11/44)
Compressing objects: 27% (12/44)
Compressing objects: 29% (13/44)
Compressing objects: 31% (14/44)
Compressing objects: 34% (15/44)
Compressing objects: 36% (16/44)
Compressing objects: 38% (17/44)
Compressing objects: 40% (18/44)
Compressing objects: 43% (19/44)
Compressing objects: 45% (20/44)
Compressing objects: 47% (21/44)
Compressing objects: 50% (22/44)
Compressing objects: 52% (23/44)
Compressing objects: 54% (24/44)
Compressing objects: 56% (25/44)
Compressing objects: 59% (26/44)
Compressing objects: 61% (27/44)
Compressing objects: 63% (28/44)
Compressing objects: 65% (29/44)
Compressing objects: 68% (30/44)
Compressing objects: 70% (31/44)
Compressing objects: 72% (32/44)
Compressing objects: 75% (33/44)
Compressing objects: 77% (34/44)
Compressing objects: 79% (35/44)
Compressing objects: 81% (36/44)
Compressing objects: 84% (37/44)
Compressing objects: 86% (38/44)
Compressing objects: 88% (39/44)
Compressing objects: 90% (40/44)
Compressing objects: 93% (41/44)
Compressing objects: 95% (42/44)
Compressing objects: 97% (43/44)
Compressing objects: 100% (44/44)
Compressing objects: 100% (44/44), done.
Writing objects: 1% (2/185)
Writing objects: 2% (4/185)
Writing objects: 3% (6/185)
Writing objects: 4% (8/185)
Writing objects: 5% (10/185)
Writing objects: 6% (12/185)
Writing objects: 7% (13/185)
Writing objects: 8% (15/185)
Writing objects: 9% (17/185)
Writing objects: 10% (19/185)
Writing objects: 11% (21/185)
Writing objects: 12% (23/185)
Writing objects: 13% (25/185)
Writing objects: 14% (26/185)
Writing objects: 15% (28/185)
Writing objects: 16% (30/185)
Writing objects: 17% (32/185)
Writing objects: 18% (34/185)
Writing objects: 19% (36/185)
Writing objects: 20% (37/185)
Writing objects: 21% (39/185)
Writing objects: 22% (41/185)
Writing objects: 23% (43/185)
Writing objects: 24% (45/185)
Writing objects: 25% (47/185)
Writing objects: 26% (49/185)
Writing objects: 28% (53/185)
Writing objects: 29% (55/185)
Writing objects: 30% (56/185)
Writing objects: 31% (58/185)
Writing objects: 32% (60/185)
Writing objects: 33% (62/185)
Writing objects: 34% (63/185)
Writing objects: 35% (66/185)
Writing objects: 36% (67/185)
Writing objects: 37% (69/185)
Writing objects: 38% (71/185)
Writing objects: 39% (73/185)
Writing objects: 40% (74/185)
Writing objects: 41% (76/185)
Writing objects: 42% (78/185)
Writing objects: 43% (80/185)
Writing objects: 44% (82/185)
Writing objects: 45% (84/185)
Writing objects: 46% (86/185)
Writing objects: 47% (87/185)
Writing objects: 48% (89/185)
Writing objects: 49% (91/185)
Writing objects: 50% (93/185)
Writing objects: 51% (95/185)
Writing objects: 52% (97/185)
Writing objects: 53% (99/185)
Writing objects: 54% (100/185)
Writing objects: 55% (102/185)
Writing objects: 56% (104/185)
Writing objects: 57% (106/185)
Writing objects: 58% (108/185)
Writing objects: 60% (111/185)
Writing objects: 61% (113/185)
Writing objects: 62% (115/185)
Writing objects: 63% (117/185)
Writing objects: 64% (119/185)
Writing objects: 65% (121/185)
Writing objects: 66% (123/185)
Writing objects: 67% (125/185)
Writing objects: 68% (126/185)
Writing objects: 69% (128/185)
Writing objects: 70% (130/185)
Writing objects: 71% (133/185)
Writing objects: 72% (134/185)
Writing objects: 75% (140/185)
Writing objects: 76% (141/185)
Writing objects: 78% (146/185)
Writing objects: 79% (147/185)
Writing objects: 80% (148/185)
Writing objects: 81% (150/185)
Writing objects: 82% (152/185)
Writing objects: 83% (154/185)
Writing objects: 85% (159/185)
Writing objects: 86% (160/185)
Writing objects: 87% (161/185)
Writing objects: 88% (163/185)
Writing objects: 89% (165/185)
Writing objects: 90% (167/185)
Writing objects: 91% (169/185)
Writing objects: 92% (171/185)
Writing objects: 93% (173/185)
Writing objects: 94% (175/185)
Writing objects: 95% (176/185)
Writing objects: 96% (178/185)
Writing objects: 97% (180/185)
Writing objects: 98% (182/185)
Writing objects: 99% (184/185)
Writing objects: 100% (185/185)
Writing objects: 100% (185/185), 42.22 KiB, done.
Total 185 (delta 140), reused 185 (delta 140)
To osstest@xenbits.xensource.com:/home/xen/git/qemu-upstream-unstable.git
b97307e..11f6a1c 11f6a1cedb8d759fd64d7dd5db95b747591f2ca7 -> master
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 126 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* Re: [qemu-upstream-unstable test] 24553: tolerable FAIL - PUSHED
2014-01-28 2:16 [qemu-upstream-unstable test] 24553: tolerable FAIL - PUSHED xen.org
@ 2014-01-28 9:37 ` Ian Campbell
2014-01-28 12:29 ` Stefano Stabellini
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Ian Campbell @ 2014-01-28 9:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: xen.org; +Cc: Anthony Perard, George Dunlap, xen-devel, Stefano Stabellini
On Tue, 2014-01-28 at 02:16 +0000, xen.org wrote:
> flight 24553 qemu-upstream-unstable real [real]
> http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~xensrcts/logs/24553/
>
> Failures :-/ but no regressions.
QEMU_UPSTREAM_REVISION in xen.git is currently set to qemu-xen-4.4.0-rc1
and so will require updating to actually pull this new stuff into the
release.
Ian.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [qemu-upstream-unstable test] 24553: tolerable FAIL - PUSHED
2014-01-28 9:37 ` Ian Campbell
@ 2014-01-28 12:29 ` Stefano Stabellini
2014-01-28 14:30 ` George Dunlap
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Stefano Stabellini @ 2014-01-28 12:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ian Campbell
Cc: Anthony Perard, Stefano Stabellini, xen-devel, xen.org,
George Dunlap
On Tue, 28 Jan 2014, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-01-28 at 02:16 +0000, xen.org wrote:
> > flight 24553 qemu-upstream-unstable real [real]
> > http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~xensrcts/logs/24553/
> >
> > Failures :-/ but no regressions.
>
> QEMU_UPSTREAM_REVISION in xen.git is currently set to qemu-xen-4.4.0-rc1
> and so will require updating to actually pull this new stuff into the
> release.
OK. But given that the new code is not part of any RCs, should I wait
for the next one? Should we go back to "master"?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [qemu-upstream-unstable test] 24553: tolerable FAIL - PUSHED
2014-01-28 12:29 ` Stefano Stabellini
@ 2014-01-28 14:30 ` George Dunlap
2014-01-28 14:32 ` Stefano Stabellini
2014-01-28 15:08 ` Jan Beulich
0 siblings, 2 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: George Dunlap @ 2014-01-28 14:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefano Stabellini, Ian Campbell
Cc: Anthony Perard, Stefano Stabellini, xen-devel, xen.org
On 01/28/2014 12:29 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Jan 2014, Ian Campbell wrote:
>> On Tue, 2014-01-28 at 02:16 +0000, xen.org wrote:
>>> flight 24553 qemu-upstream-unstable real [real]
>>> http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~xensrcts/logs/24553/
>>>
>>> Failures :-/ but no regressions.
>>
>> QEMU_UPSTREAM_REVISION in xen.git is currently set to qemu-xen-4.4.0-rc1
>> and so will require updating to actually pull this new stuff into the
>> release.
>
> OK. But given that the new code is not part of any RCs, should I wait
> for the next one? Should we go back to "master"?
I guess we should have gone back to "master" after tagging the last RC?
-George
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [qemu-upstream-unstable test] 24553: tolerable FAIL - PUSHED
2014-01-28 14:30 ` George Dunlap
@ 2014-01-28 14:32 ` Stefano Stabellini
2014-01-28 15:08 ` Jan Beulich
1 sibling, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Stefano Stabellini @ 2014-01-28 14:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: George Dunlap
Cc: xen-devel, Ian Campbell, Stefano Stabellini, xen.org,
Stefano Stabellini, Anthony Perard
On Tue, 28 Jan 2014, George Dunlap wrote:
> On 01/28/2014 12:29 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > On Tue, 28 Jan 2014, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2014-01-28 at 02:16 +0000, xen.org wrote:
> > > > flight 24553 qemu-upstream-unstable real [real]
> > > > http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~xensrcts/logs/24553/
> > > >
> > > > Failures :-/ but no regressions.
> > >
> > > QEMU_UPSTREAM_REVISION in xen.git is currently set to qemu-xen-4.4.0-rc1
> > > and so will require updating to actually pull this new stuff into the
> > > release.
> >
> > OK. But given that the new code is not part of any RCs, should I wait
> > for the next one? Should we go back to "master"?
>
> I guess we should have gone back to "master" after tagging the last RC?
I think so.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [qemu-upstream-unstable test] 24553: tolerable FAIL - PUSHED
2014-01-28 14:30 ` George Dunlap
2014-01-28 14:32 ` Stefano Stabellini
@ 2014-01-28 15:08 ` Jan Beulich
2014-01-28 15:24 ` Stefano Stabellini
2014-01-28 15:31 ` Ian Campbell
1 sibling, 2 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Jan Beulich @ 2014-01-28 15:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: George Dunlap, Stefano Stabellini
Cc: Anthony Perard, xen.org, Stefano Stabellini, Ian Campbell,
xen-devel
>>> On 28.01.14 at 15:30, George Dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
> On 01/28/2014 12:29 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
>> On Tue, 28 Jan 2014, Ian Campbell wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2014-01-28 at 02:16 +0000, xen.org wrote:
>>>> flight 24553 qemu-upstream-unstable real [real]
>>>> http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~xensrcts/logs/24553/
>>>>
>>>> Failures :-/ but no regressions.
>>>
>>> QEMU_UPSTREAM_REVISION in xen.git is currently set to qemu-xen-4.4.0-rc1
>>> and so will require updating to actually pull this new stuff into the
>>> release.
>>
>> OK. But given that the new code is not part of any RCs, should I wait
>> for the next one? Should we go back to "master"?
>
> I guess we should have gone back to "master" after tagging the last RC?
Correct - this should have happened the moment the first new
commit passed the push gate on the qemuu tree. Don't know
whether there would be a way to automate this...
Jan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [qemu-upstream-unstable test] 24553: tolerable FAIL - PUSHED
2014-01-28 15:08 ` Jan Beulich
@ 2014-01-28 15:24 ` Stefano Stabellini
2014-01-28 15:31 ` Ian Campbell
1 sibling, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Stefano Stabellini @ 2014-01-28 15:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jan Beulich
Cc: Ian Campbell, Stefano Stabellini, George Dunlap, xen.org,
Stefano Stabellini, Anthony Perard, xen-devel
On Tue, 28 Jan 2014, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 28.01.14 at 15:30, George Dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
> > On 01/28/2014 12:29 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> >> On Tue, 28 Jan 2014, Ian Campbell wrote:
> >>> On Tue, 2014-01-28 at 02:16 +0000, xen.org wrote:
> >>>> flight 24553 qemu-upstream-unstable real [real]
> >>>> http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~xensrcts/logs/24553/
> >>>>
> >>>> Failures :-/ but no regressions.
> >>>
> >>> QEMU_UPSTREAM_REVISION in xen.git is currently set to qemu-xen-4.4.0-rc1
> >>> and so will require updating to actually pull this new stuff into the
> >>> release.
> >>
> >> OK. But given that the new code is not part of any RCs, should I wait
> >> for the next one? Should we go back to "master"?
> >
> > I guess we should have gone back to "master" after tagging the last RC?
>
> Correct - this should have happened the moment the first new
> commit passed the push gate on the qemuu tree. Don't know
> whether there would be a way to automate this...
I have just sent a patch to go back to master.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [qemu-upstream-unstable test] 24553: tolerable FAIL - PUSHED
2014-01-28 15:08 ` Jan Beulich
2014-01-28 15:24 ` Stefano Stabellini
@ 2014-01-28 15:31 ` Ian Campbell
2014-01-28 15:33 ` Stefano Stabellini
2014-01-28 15:37 ` Jan Beulich
1 sibling, 2 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Ian Campbell @ 2014-01-28 15:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jan Beulich
Cc: Stefano Stabellini, George Dunlap, xen.org, Stefano Stabellini,
Anthony Perard, xen-devel
On Tue, 2014-01-28 at 15:08 +0000, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 28.01.14 at 15:30, George Dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
> > On 01/28/2014 12:29 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> >> On Tue, 28 Jan 2014, Ian Campbell wrote:
> >>> On Tue, 2014-01-28 at 02:16 +0000, xen.org wrote:
> >>>> flight 24553 qemu-upstream-unstable real [real]
> >>>> http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~xensrcts/logs/24553/
> >>>>
> >>>> Failures :-/ but no regressions.
> >>>
> >>> QEMU_UPSTREAM_REVISION in xen.git is currently set to qemu-xen-4.4.0-rc1
> >>> and so will require updating to actually pull this new stuff into the
> >>> release.
> >>
> >> OK. But given that the new code is not part of any RCs, should I wait
> >> for the next one? Should we go back to "master"?
> >
> > I guess we should have gone back to "master" after tagging the last RC?
>
> Correct - this should have happened the moment the first new
> commit passed the push gate on the qemuu tree.
There's no need to wait that long -- this can be done in a commit which
immediately follows the one tagged as the rc.
> Don't know whether there would be a way to automate this...
It sounds like it would be tricky. I suppose a cronjob which verifies
that xen.git/staging always either says "master" or refers to a tag
which is the latest in qemu.git might work, but it sounds subtle and
error prone to me.
Ian.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [qemu-upstream-unstable test] 24553: tolerable FAIL - PUSHED
2014-01-28 15:31 ` Ian Campbell
@ 2014-01-28 15:33 ` Stefano Stabellini
2014-01-28 15:36 ` Ian Campbell
2014-01-28 15:37 ` Jan Beulich
1 sibling, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Stefano Stabellini @ 2014-01-28 15:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ian Campbell
Cc: Stefano Stabellini, George Dunlap, xen.org, Stefano Stabellini,
Jan Beulich, Anthony Perard, xen-devel
On Tue, 28 Jan 2014, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-01-28 at 15:08 +0000, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > >>> On 28.01.14 at 15:30, George Dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
> > > On 01/28/2014 12:29 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > >> On Tue, 28 Jan 2014, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > >>> On Tue, 2014-01-28 at 02:16 +0000, xen.org wrote:
> > >>>> flight 24553 qemu-upstream-unstable real [real]
> > >>>> http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~xensrcts/logs/24553/
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Failures :-/ but no regressions.
> > >>>
> > >>> QEMU_UPSTREAM_REVISION in xen.git is currently set to qemu-xen-4.4.0-rc1
> > >>> and so will require updating to actually pull this new stuff into the
> > >>> release.
> > >>
> > >> OK. But given that the new code is not part of any RCs, should I wait
> > >> for the next one? Should we go back to "master"?
> > >
> > > I guess we should have gone back to "master" after tagging the last RC?
> >
> > Correct - this should have happened the moment the first new
> > commit passed the push gate on the qemuu tree.
>
> There's no need to wait that long -- this can be done in a commit which
> immediately follows the one tagged as the rc.
Formally I am not a committer on xen-unstable.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [qemu-upstream-unstable test] 24553: tolerable FAIL - PUSHED
2014-01-28 15:33 ` Stefano Stabellini
@ 2014-01-28 15:36 ` Ian Campbell
2014-01-28 15:48 ` Jan Beulich
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Ian Campbell @ 2014-01-28 15:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefano Stabellini
Cc: George Dunlap, xen.org, Stefano Stabellini, Jan Beulich,
Anthony Perard, xen-devel
On Tue, 2014-01-28 at 15:33 +0000, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Jan 2014, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > On Tue, 2014-01-28 at 15:08 +0000, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > >>> On 28.01.14 at 15:30, George Dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
> > > > On 01/28/2014 12:29 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > > >> On Tue, 28 Jan 2014, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > > >>> On Tue, 2014-01-28 at 02:16 +0000, xen.org wrote:
> > > >>>> flight 24553 qemu-upstream-unstable real [real]
> > > >>>> http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~xensrcts/logs/24553/
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Failures :-/ but no regressions.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> QEMU_UPSTREAM_REVISION in xen.git is currently set to qemu-xen-4.4.0-rc1
> > > >>> and so will require updating to actually pull this new stuff into the
> > > >>> release.
> > > >>
> > > >> OK. But given that the new code is not part of any RCs, should I wait
> > > >> for the next one? Should we go back to "master"?
> > > >
> > > > I guess we should have gone back to "master" after tagging the last RC?
> > >
> > > Correct - this should have happened the moment the first new
> > > commit passed the push gate on the qemuu tree.
> >
> > There's no need to wait that long -- this can be done in a commit which
> > immediately follows the one tagged as the rc.
>
> Formally I am not a committer on xen-unstable.
I was meaning that the person cutting the rc should do it.
But that brings up an interesting point. FWIW I think it would be
absolutely fine for the committer responsible for one of the separate
trees to push updates to the bits of xen.git which pull in that code,
specifically the Config.mk bits.
Ian.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [qemu-upstream-unstable test] 24553: tolerable FAIL - PUSHED
2014-01-28 15:36 ` Ian Campbell
@ 2014-01-28 15:48 ` Jan Beulich
0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Jan Beulich @ 2014-01-28 15:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ian Campbell
Cc: Stefano Stabellini, George Dunlap, xen.org, Stefano Stabellini,
Anthony Perard, xen-devel
>>> On 28.01.14 at 16:36, Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com> wrote:
> But that brings up an interesting point. FWIW I think it would be
> absolutely fine for the committer responsible for one of the separate
> trees to push updates to the bits of xen.git which pull in that code,
> specifically the Config.mk bits.
Yet if we didn't refer to specific commit IDs, but instead - like we
now intend to be doing for qemuu - to a branch head, such
updates wouldn't be necessary anymore other than for RC or
release purposes.
Jan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [qemu-upstream-unstable test] 24553: tolerable FAIL - PUSHED
2014-01-28 15:31 ` Ian Campbell
2014-01-28 15:33 ` Stefano Stabellini
@ 2014-01-28 15:37 ` Jan Beulich
2014-01-28 15:42 ` Ian Campbell
1 sibling, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Jan Beulich @ 2014-01-28 15:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ian Campbell
Cc: Stefano Stabellini, George Dunlap, xen.org, Stefano Stabellini,
Anthony Perard, xen-devel
>>> On 28.01.14 at 16:31, Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-01-28 at 15:08 +0000, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >>> On 28.01.14 at 15:30, George Dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
>> > On 01/28/2014 12:29 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
>> >> On Tue, 28 Jan 2014, Ian Campbell wrote:
>> >>> On Tue, 2014-01-28 at 02:16 +0000, xen.org wrote:
>> >>>> flight 24553 qemu-upstream-unstable real [real]
>> >>>> http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~xensrcts/logs/24553/
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Failures :-/ but no regressions.
>> >>>
>> >>> QEMU_UPSTREAM_REVISION in xen.git is currently set to qemu-xen-4.4.0-rc1
>> >>> and so will require updating to actually pull this new stuff into the
>> >>> release.
>> >>
>> >> OK. But given that the new code is not part of any RCs, should I wait
>> >> for the next one? Should we go back to "master"?
>> >
>> > I guess we should have gone back to "master" after tagging the last RC?
>>
>> Correct - this should have happened the moment the first new
>> commit passed the push gate on the qemuu tree.
>
> There's no need to wait that long -- this can be done in a commit which
> immediately follows the one tagged as the rc.
Except that it might end up being pointless if nothing really
changes in qemuu until the next RC (or the final release).
>> Don't know whether there would be a way to automate this...
>
> It sounds like it would be tricky. I suppose a cronjob which verifies
> that xen.git/staging always either says "master" or refers to a tag
> which is the latest in qemu.git might work, but it sounds subtle and
> error prone to me.
Yes, I realize there would be a number of "special" situations to
take into consideration...
Jan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [qemu-upstream-unstable test] 24553: tolerable FAIL - PUSHED
2014-01-28 15:37 ` Jan Beulich
@ 2014-01-28 15:42 ` Ian Campbell
0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Ian Campbell @ 2014-01-28 15:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jan Beulich
Cc: Stefano Stabellini, George Dunlap, xen.org, Stefano Stabellini,
Anthony Perard, xen-devel
On Tue, 2014-01-28 at 15:37 +0000, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 28.01.14 at 16:31, Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, 2014-01-28 at 15:08 +0000, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> >>> On 28.01.14 at 15:30, George Dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
> >> > On 01/28/2014 12:29 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> >> >> On Tue, 28 Jan 2014, Ian Campbell wrote:
> >> >>> On Tue, 2014-01-28 at 02:16 +0000, xen.org wrote:
> >> >>>> flight 24553 qemu-upstream-unstable real [real]
> >> >>>> http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~xensrcts/logs/24553/
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Failures :-/ but no regressions.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> QEMU_UPSTREAM_REVISION in xen.git is currently set to qemu-xen-4.4.0-rc1
> >> >>> and so will require updating to actually pull this new stuff into the
> >> >>> release.
> >> >>
> >> >> OK. But given that the new code is not part of any RCs, should I wait
> >> >> for the next one? Should we go back to "master"?
> >> >
> >> > I guess we should have gone back to "master" after tagging the last RC?
> >>
> >> Correct - this should have happened the moment the first new
> >> commit passed the push gate on the qemuu tree.
> >
> > There's no need to wait that long -- this can be done in a commit which
> > immediately follows the one tagged as the rc.
>
> Except that it might end up being pointless if nothing really
> changes in qemuu until the next RC (or the final release).
The "point" is to do it while we are thinking about it, not at some
random later date when we are more than likely going to forget.
>
> >> Don't know whether there would be a way to automate this...
> >
> > It sounds like it would be tricky. I suppose a cronjob which verifies
> > that xen.git/staging always either says "master" or refers to a tag
> > which is the latest in qemu.git might work, but it sounds subtle and
> > error prone to me.
>
> Yes, I realize there would be a number of "special" situations to
> take into consideration...
>
> Jan
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2014-01-28 15:48 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2014-01-28 2:16 [qemu-upstream-unstable test] 24553: tolerable FAIL - PUSHED xen.org
2014-01-28 9:37 ` Ian Campbell
2014-01-28 12:29 ` Stefano Stabellini
2014-01-28 14:30 ` George Dunlap
2014-01-28 14:32 ` Stefano Stabellini
2014-01-28 15:08 ` Jan Beulich
2014-01-28 15:24 ` Stefano Stabellini
2014-01-28 15:31 ` Ian Campbell
2014-01-28 15:33 ` Stefano Stabellini
2014-01-28 15:36 ` Ian Campbell
2014-01-28 15:48 ` Jan Beulich
2014-01-28 15:37 ` Jan Beulich
2014-01-28 15:42 ` Ian Campbell
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.