[Xen-devel] [ovmf baseline-only test] 75111: tolerable FAIL

[Platform Team regression test user <citrix-osstest@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

This run is configured for baseline tests only.

flight 75111 ovmf real [real]
http://osstest.xensource.com/osstest/logs/75111/

Failures :-/ but no regressions.

Tests which did not succeed, but are not blocking:
 test-amd64-amd64-xl-qemuu-ovmf-amd64 10 debian-hvm-install     fail like 75109
 test-amd64-i386-xl-qemuu-ovmf-amd64 10 debian-hvm-install      fail like 75109

version targeted for testing:
 ovmf                 aa4e0df1f0c7ffdff07d7e382c9da89cbe207cdb
baseline version:
 ovmf                 0442a9a9f42abed9f2e44e63115a3abb0d123459

Last test of basis    75109  2018-08-23 04:54:51 Z    0 days
Testing same since    75111  2018-08-23 22:54:12 Z    0 days    1 attempts

------------------------------------------------------------
People who touched revisions under test:
  Laszlo Ersek <lersek@xxxxxxxxxx>

jobs:
 build-amd64-xsm                                              pass    
 build-i386-xsm                                               pass    
 build-amd64                                                  pass    
 build-i386                                                   pass    
 build-amd64-libvirt                                          pass    
 build-i386-libvirt                                           pass    
 build-amd64-pvops                                            pass    
 build-i386-pvops                                             pass    
 test-amd64-amd64-xl-qemuu-ovmf-amd64                         fail    
 test-amd64-i386-xl-qemuu-ovmf-amd64                          fail    


------------------------------------------------------------
sg-report-flight on osstest.xs.citrite.net
logs: /home/osstest/logs
images: /home/osstest/images

Logs, config files, etc. are available at
    http://osstest.xensource.com/osstest/logs

Test harness code can be found at
    http://xenbits.xensource.com/gitweb?p=osstest.git;a=summary


Push not applicable.

------------------------------------------------------------
commit aa4e0df1f0c7ffdff07d7e382c9da89cbe207cdb
Author: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date:   Thu Aug 16 19:38:02 2018 -0700

    BaseTools/VfrCompile: honor EXTRA_LDFLAGS
    
    In commit 81502cee20ac ("BaseTools/Source/C: take EXTRA_LDFLAGS from the
    caller", 2018-08-16), I missed that "VfrCompile/GNUmakefile" does not use
    BUILD_LFLAGS in the APPLICATION linking rule, unlike "app.makefile" does.
    Instead, "VfrCompile/GNUmakefile" uses the (undefined) LFLAGS macro.
    Therefore commit 81502cee20ac did not cover the linking step of
    VfrCompile.
    
    Thankfully, the structure of the linking rules is the same, between
    "app.makefile" and "VfrCompile/GNUmakefile". Rename the undefined LFLAGS
    macro in "VfrCompile/GNUmakefile" to VFR_LFLAGS (for consistency with
    VFR_CXXFLAGS), and set it to EXTRA_LDFLAGS.
    
    As a result, we have:
    
                 | compilation                    | linking
      -----------+--------------------------------+----------------------
      VfrCompile | VFR_CXXFLAGS =                 | VFR_LFLAGS =
                 | BUILD_OPTFLAGS =               | EXTRA_LDFLAGS
                 | '-O2' + EXTRA_OPTFLAGS         |
      -----------+--------------------------------+----------------------
      other apps | BUILD_CFLAGS/BUILD_CXXFLAGS =  | BUILD_LFLAGS =
                 | [...] + BUILD_OPTFLAGS =       | [...] + EXTRA_LDFLAGS
                 | [...] + '-O2' + EXTRA_OPTFLAGS |
    
    This table shows
    - that the VfrCompile compilation and linking flags are always a subset of
      the corresponding flags used by the other apps,
    - and that the EXTRA flags are always at the end.
    
    Cc: Liming Gao <liming.gao@xxxxxxxxx>
    Cc: Yonghong Zhu <yonghong.zhu@xxxxxxxxx>
    Ref: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540244
    Fixes: 81502cee20ac4046f08bb4aec754c7091c8808dc
    Contributed-under: TianoCore Contribution Agreement 1.1
    Signed-off-by: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@xxxxxxxxxx>
    Reviewed-by: Liming Gao <liming.gao@xxxxxxxxx>

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel