From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dario Faggioli Subject: Re: [xen-unstable test] 97737: regressions - FAIL Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2016 14:10:03 +0200 Message-ID: <1469189403.13039.296.camel@citrix.com> References: <20160722104930.GA17004@citrix.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3839863908814911511==" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20160722104930.GA17004@citrix.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Sender: "Xen-devel" To: Wei Liu , osstest service owner Cc: George Dunlap , xen-devel@lists.xensource.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org --===============3839863908814911511== Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-A0YQPXcCJPGx4pcJYxCV" --=-A0YQPXcCJPGx4pcJYxCV Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, 2016-07-22 at 11:49 +0100, Wei Liu wrote: > On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 03:27:30AM +0000, osstest service owner > wrote: > >=20 > > flight 97737 xen-unstable real [real] > > http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/97737/ > >=20 > > Regressions :-( > >=20 > > Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, > > including tests which could not be run: > > =C2=A0test-amd64-amd64-xl-credit2=C2=A0=C2=A019 guest-start/debian.repe= at fail > > REGR. vs. 97664 > > =C2=A0test-armhf-armhf-xl=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2= =A0=C2=A0=C2=A015 guest-start/debian.repeat fail > > REGR. vs. 97664 > > =C2=A0test-armhf-armhf-xl-credit2=C2=A0=C2=A015 guest-start/debian.repe= at fail > > REGR. vs. 97664 > Thanks from bringing my attention to this. I've seen it happening in local testing a few times also, and was investigating already. > From > http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/97737/test-amd64-amd > 64-xl-credit2/serial-fiano0.log >=20 > Jul 21 07:38:22.383917 (XEN) Assertion 'rqd->avgload >=3D 0 && rqd- > >b_avgload >=3D 0' failed at sched_credit2.c:734 > Right. My investigation shows that it is the b_avgload>=3D0 check that is actually failing, and looking at the code confirmed that, and I found out why. I've just sent a patch that I believe will fix this. I can't find it in the archives yet, but it should be: =C2=A0[PATCH] xen: credit2: don't let b_avgload go negative. =C2=A0msg-id: <146918909364.19443.6394900696027710502.stgit@Solace.fritz.bo= x> Regards, Dario --=20 <> (Raistlin Majere) ----------------------------------------------------------------- Dario Faggioli, Ph.D, http://about.me/dario.faggioli Senior Software Engineer, Citrix Systems R&D Ltd., Cambridge (UK) --=-A0YQPXcCJPGx4pcJYxCV Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAABCAAGBQJXkg0bAAoJEBZCeImluHPufokP/0fI7F3uVw2Ci66G0bM7L71d x51yTHlcRgsDFz+3jYhoCWDNNLAJEaxtjX/9Sg2pKk2eIx6Pn+uTza/lfIRDb417 Vx7eCXUo0ynvqyrxsqVtOZJAFXv3rnHYYrcm2qGY0zQcQb2L3OPF1kZyBs5P7kuY cOzYkfACSxiR8f8imLZH3uvofjDYFU/cp+P+Vpe7IkCEmGZ12YnKDBFPkkDUj64y StaLFQNJB9gouVlZvKlkXi/KEZDPx1tVtkSgzgIg2MrCzLz8J3QSiKR96rnhrVmR xOu4YvlHbADPc29haLm4SttIM/ghEJ4fg8rO4neVZjSqbx06gG3OM+aYikP13Kuj bw3MiBpJgvd3q/7tY9y42/hftr60WCr/YahnhNqxneS+y44q96wVqRXdM7n3ai1q WG7YQY2khxPV2xwZqE2hZrppklZwt5w4uIBp2+YS6MU1ZkbDqRFf6TFprq4a57K6 p8JQvl7OdC19LPwkwwzgdT+DB21U9ztdX16+W1lpNjtJOdQB3tt35OOn7ON5QLNX Aox3TTKBwC2XJgkqae0uHXn2623gw9cAANxmB1nJ7K41bM/3kbVHrxTa9C+//w1A wmUlnFzHBKC/X1dNl8PFnCMmLfi0a8jD4fBjOg/2l0CYZIfHiRrMr+xJKugsLaht hCo5WDPoTz9kaudCqRll =nRzG -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-A0YQPXcCJPGx4pcJYxCV-- --===============3839863908814911511== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18KWGVuLWRldmVs IG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdApYZW4tZGV2ZWxAbGlzdHMueGVuLm9yZwpodHRwczovL2xpc3RzLnhlbi5v cmcveGVuLWRldmVsCg== --===============3839863908814911511==--