Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-unstable test] 59040: regressions - FAIL

[Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 2015-07-06 at 14:23 +0100, Wei Liu wrote:

> I saw this bug since the introduction of amd64-i386 stubdom test case.
> Now it looks like intermittent, i.e. we failed at the beginning, passed
> at some point, now it failed again.

http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/results/history/test-amd64-i386-xl-qemut-stubdom-debianhvm-amd64-xsm/xen-unstable.html
gives the history of it.

It looks as if italia* and chardonnay* might be susceptible but really I
don't think there is sufficient information to draw any particular
conclusion wrt the frequency of this bug or whether it might be host
specific or not, since the passes on other hosts are general singletons.

The 64-bit dom0 case is at
http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/results/history/test-amd64-amd64-xl-qemut-stubdom-debianhvm-amd64-xsm/xen-unstable.html
I'm not sure what, if anything, it tells us though. It does look to be
more less prone to errors (it having now hit merlot notwithstanding,
although it seems to reliably pass the install phase there).

One potentially interesting case is that in the 32-bit dom0 case the
stubdom is also 32-bit, while in the other case the stubdom is 64-bit.

I'm not convinced using a 32-bit stubdom is the right choice, but I
suppose it ought to work.

Ian.



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