Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-unstable test] 77945: regressions - FAIL

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 13.01.16 at 20:30, <osstest-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> flight 77945 xen-unstable real [real]
> http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/77945/ 
> 
> Regressions :-(
> 
> Tests which did not succeed and are blocking,
> including tests which could not be run:
>  test-amd64-i386-xl-qemut-stubdom-debianhvm-amd64-xsm 5 xen-install fail 
> REGR. vs. 77892
>  test-amd64-amd64-xl-xsm       5 xen-install               fail REGR. vs. 
> 77892
>  test-amd64-i386-xl-xsm        5 xen-install               fail REGR. vs. 
> 77892
>  test-amd64-amd64-xl-qemut-stubdom-debianhvm-amd64-xsm 5 xen-install fail 
> REGR. vs. 77892
>  test-amd64-i386-xl-qemut-debianhvm-amd64-xsm 5 xen-install fail REGR. vs. 
> 77892
>  test-amd64-amd64-xl-qemuu-debianhvm-amd64-xsm 5 xen-install fail REGR. vs. 
> 77892
>  test-amd64-amd64-xl-qemut-debianhvm-amd64-xsm 5 xen-install fail REGR. vs. 
> 77892
>  test-amd64-i386-xl-qemuu-debianhvm-amd64-xsm 5 xen-install fail REGR. vs. 
> 77892

All perhaps because of multiple instances of

2016-01-13 16:20:48 Z (skipping entry at 303..316; XSM policy file not present) 
2016-01-13 16:20:48 Z (skipping entry at 317..330; XSM policy file not present) 

? Are we having another ordering problem with the XSM/FLASK
Kconfig-conversion patches?

Jan


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