Re: [Xen-devel] [linux-linus test] 61295: regressions - FAIL

[Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, 1 Oct 2015, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-09-09 at 11:31 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > On Thu, 2015-09-03 at 23:29 +0000, osstest service owner wrote:
> > > flight 61295 linux-linus real [real]
> > > http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/61295/
> > > 
> > > Regressions :-(
> > > 
> > > Tests which did not succeed and are blocking,
> > > including tests which could not be run:
> > > [...]
> > >  test-armhf-armhf-xl-cubietruck  6 xen-boot                fail REGR.
> > > vs. 59254
> > > [...]
> > 
> > The bisector has fingered[0] a merge commit, f36fc04e4cdd, from the clk
> > tree.
> > 
> [...]
> > Between 26f8b7edc9ea and f36fc04e4cdd there is:
> > 
> >  * no diff to arch/arm/mach-sunxi/ 
> >  * addition or changes of "clock-indices" property in many
> >    arch/arm/boot/dts/*sun?i*
> >  * a bunch of changes in drivers/clk/*sun?i*
> 
> This turned out to be an incompatible change between the kernel and the
> DTB. osstest currently keeps using the Debian supplied DTB for all tests,
> rather than picking up the one from the kernel it has built.
> 
> I've reported this upstream:
>     
> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2015-October/373753.html
> 
> In theory the DTB are supposed to be a stable API and the kernel is
> supposed to work with shipped DTBS. The reality doesn't really live up to
> this ideal though and I don't think it is really our job to fight this, so
> I plan to adjust osstest to use the DTBs built by ts-kernel-build. In fact
> this is probably preferable for us since it means we will be testing Xen
> with a variety of DTBs over the different kernel versions, instead of just
> the ones which Debian supplies.
> 
> I'll cook up some osstest patches today.

I completely agree

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