From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57276) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cjnAB-0000jT-AE for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 03 Mar 2017 08:22:28 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cjnA8-0003Xn-5L for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 03 Mar 2017 08:22:27 -0500 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:60270 helo=mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cjnA7-0003Xd-Va for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 03 Mar 2017 08:22:24 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098420.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.20/8.16.0.20) with SMTP id v23DDcHn036237 for ; Fri, 3 Mar 2017 08:22:23 -0500 Received: from e36.co.us.ibm.com (e36.co.us.ibm.com [32.97.110.154]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 28xs8fftpd-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Fri, 03 Mar 2017 08:22:22 -0500 Received: from localhost by e36.co.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Fri, 3 Mar 2017 06:22:22 -0700 References: <148847238435.285.7158100214182923369@0e2666bad730> <20170303095301.GE7097@lemon.lan> From: Christian Borntraeger Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2017 14:22:17 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20170303095301.GE7097@lemon.lan> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <7010a04e-a8c0-16a9-c9bf-c22e32b521c3@de.ibm.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PULL v2 0/3] Merge qio 2017/02/27 List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Fam Zheng Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, berrange@redhat.com, peter.maydell@linaro.org On 03/03/2017 10:53 AM, Fam Zheng wrote: > On Fri, 03/03 09:12, Christian Borntraeger wrote: >> On 03/02/2017 05:33 PM, no-reply@patchew.org wrote: >> >> Fam, this seems to happen sometimes. Can you have a look at that why the qtest >> thing fails on the s390 box? > > I don't know, when I run the commands manually for a few times, it is not > reproduced. :( > > Fam Any chance to add V=1 to the make check, so that we get the full testcase output?