Re: [xen-unstable test] 149520: regressions - FAIL

[Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

On 09.04.2020 12:23, Jürgen Groß wrote:
> On 09.04.20 11:00, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 09.04.2020 10:56, Jürgen Groß wrote:
>>> On 09.04.20 10:00, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 09.04.2020 09:31, Jürgen Groß wrote:
>>>>> On 09.04.20 04:30, osstest service owner wrote:
>>>>>> flight 149520 xen-unstable real [real]
>>>>>> http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/149520/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regressions :-(
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tests which did not succeed and are blocking,
>>>>>> including tests which could not be run:
>>>>>>     test-amd64-amd64-xl-qemut-stubdom-debianhvm-amd64-xsm 13 
>>>>>> guest-saverestore fail REGR. vs. 149478
>>>>>>     test-amd64-i386-xl-qemut-stubdom-debianhvm-amd64-xsm 10 
>>>>>> debian-hvm-install fail REGR. vs. 149478
>>>>>
>>>>> Is it possible to get the ioemu-stubdom binary used in those tests?
>>>>
>>>> Isn't this the usr/local/lib/xen/boot/ioemu-stubdom.gz in
>>>> http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/149520/build-amd64-xsm/build/dist.tar.gz
>>>
>>> No, the crashed one was a 32-bit stubdom, while this file is a 64-bit
>>> one. According to the log the path should be fine, but the file in no
>>> way matches the crashed one.
>>
>> Then look under 
>> http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/149520/build-i386-xsm/build/
>> or any of the other 
>> http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/149520/build-*/build/?
>> I'm pretty sure all produced binaries get collected and made available.
> 
> Yes, there it could be found.
> 
> I'm still struggling to understand why the stubdom is built as 32-bit
> binary for this test.

Aiui in test-amd64-i386-xl-qemut-stubdom-debianhvm-amd64-xsm
the first amd64 stands for the host (Xen) architecture, the
last for the guest one, and the i386 for the tool stack's. I
assume the stubdom binary chosen is picked based on the tool
stack properties, despite it running in a different domain.

Jan