Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-4.4-testing test] 25962: regressions - FAIL

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 30.04.14 at 16:34, <Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Jan Beulich writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-4.4-testing test] 25962: 
> regressions - 
> FAIL"):
>> On 24.04.14 at 09:52, <Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > flight 25962 xen-4.4-testing real [real]
>> > http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~xensrcts/logs/25962/ 
> ...
>> Interleaving the two logs I wonder whether the 7000s timeout is just
>> a little too short here (which might explain why we see this kind of test
>> fail not that infrequently):
> 
> No, I don't think so.  In 25996 (itch-mite, Intel X3450, 8 cores, 8G)
> this test took only 2007s.  It may be host-specific - 25962 was on
> lake-frog (AMD 6168, 24 cores, 32G).

If it's host specific, the one global timeout may still be too short on
one host, and quite long enough on another. That said, a ratio of
over 3:1 between two hosts where the apparently slower one is
actually faster is of course quite odd. Problem is - from the logs I
once again can't see what's going wrong here, and there's not that
many changes pending on the 4.4 branch that one couldn't tell that
with them having passed on -unstable they should pass here too.

Jan


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel