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

[Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, 2016-01-14 at 08:07 -0600, Doug Goldstein wrote:
> On 1/14/16 7:57 AM, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > On Thu, 2016-01-14 at 05:50 -0700, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > > > > On 14.01.16 at 12:42, <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > The bisector is working:
> > > > http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/results/bisect/xen-unst
> > > > able
> > > > /test 
> > > > -amd64-i386-xl-qemut-stubdom-debianhvm-amd64-xsm.xen-install.html
> > > > 
> > > > and has gotten to this range:
> > > > 
> > > > ÂÂÂÂ$ git log --oneline 5513bd0b4675..20c8f1a8a5fd
> > > > ÂÂÂÂ20c8f1a convert XSM_ENABLE to Kconfig
> > > > ÂÂÂÂ529298f convert FLASK_ENABLE to Kconfig
> > > > ÂÂÂÂ361b4f9 build: save generated xen .config
> > > > ÂÂÂÂe3cce17 x86/VPMU: implement ipc and arch filter flags
> > > > 
> > > > I suspect the issue is that 529298f removes FLASK_ENABLE from the
> > > > top-
> > > > level, but that is used in tools/Makefile. i.e. there is that other
> > > > patch
> > > > which needed to go before the two included above.
> > > 
> > > And is that other patch ready to go in? If not, do we need to
> > > revert another time?
> > 
> > I think that is likely to be the case, yes.
> > 
> > > In any event - Doug, you should point out such dependencies in
> > > the submission, e.g. after the first --- marker.
> > 
> > Really they should have been in the same series in this case.
> > 
> > Ian.
> > 
> 
> They were all in the same thread. And were all acked. But the first one
> against the tools shouldn't have been necessary, it should have still
> built.

I was talking about "tools: make flask utils build unconditional" from <145
0759603-24249-1-git-send-email-cardoe@xxxxxxxxxx> whichÂappears to be a
singleton patch, not part of a series. Maybe that is unrelated to this
breakage then?

Ian.



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