Re: [Xen-devel] [linux-3.18 bisection] complete test-amd64-amd64-pair

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 12.12.18 at 22:41, <osstest-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> branch xen-unstable
> xenbranch xen-unstable
> job test-amd64-amd64-pair
> testid xen-boot/src_host
> 
> Tree: linux 
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable.git
> Tree: linuxfirmware git://xenbits.xen.org/osstest/linux-firmware.git
> Tree: qemu git://xenbits.xen.org/qemu-xen-traditional.git
> Tree: qemuu git://xenbits.xen.org/qemu-xen.git
> Tree: xen git://xenbits.xen.org/xen.git
> 
> *** Found and reproduced problem changeset ***
> 
>   Bug is in tree:  linux 
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable.git
>   Bug introduced:  7b8052e19304865477e03a0047062d977309a22f
>   Bug not present: d255d18a34a8d53ccc4a019dc07e17b6e8cf6bd1
>   Last fail repro: http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/131278/ 
> 
> 
>   commit 7b8052e19304865477e03a0047062d977309a22f
>   Author: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>
>   Date:   Mon Oct 19 04:23:29 2015 -0600
>   
>       igb: fix NULL derefs due to skipped SR-IOV enabling

_Very_ interesting. An over three years old commit was determined
to cause whatever regression it is. But wait - that's the date of the
mainline commit, not that of the backport (which was done a month
ago). I notice that of the two original commits the combination of
which the one here is supposed to fix, only one actually got
backported. Hence I wonder whether backporting the one here
was actually appropriate.

Jan



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