Re: [xen-unstable-smoke test] 173362: regressions - FAIL

[Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

On 30.09.2022 12:22, Anthony PERARD wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 08:31:20AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 29.09.2022 18:25, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>> On 29/09/2022 17:22, osstest service owner wrote:
>>>> flight 173362 xen-unstable-smoke real [real]
>>>> http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/173362/
>>>>
>>>> Regressions :-(
>>>>
>>>> Tests which did not succeed and are blocking,
>>>> including tests which could not be run:
>>>>  build-arm64-xsm               6 xen-build                fail REGR. vs. 
>>>> 173347
>>>
>>> arch/arm/gic-v3-its.c: In function 'gicv3_its_deny_access':
>>> arch/arm/gic-v3-its.c:905:32: error: passing argument 1 of
>>> 'iomem_deny_access' discards 'const' qualifier from pointer target type
>>> [-Werror=discarded-qualifiers]
>>>          rc = iomem_deny_access(d, mfn, mfn + nr);
>>>                                 ^
>>> In file included from arch/arm/gic-v3-its.c:24:
>>> ./include/xen/iocap.h:32:52: note: expected 'struct domain *' but
>>> argument is of type 'const struct domain *'
>>>  static inline int iomem_deny_access(struct domain *d, unsigned long s,
>>>                                      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^
>>> cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
>>
>> I've sent a patch, but this raises another question: Why does the smoke
>> test (try to) build an unsupported configuration? HAS_ITS (which is
>> necessary to be set for the issue to surface) has its prompt depend on
>> UNSUPPORTED, and (implicitly) defaults to N.
> 
> According to osstest sources:
>     # ITS driver is required to boot the Hardware Domain
>     # on Xen. For now (Xen 4.10/4.11 at at least),
>     # will be not built by default and gated by expert mode
>     echo >>xen/.config CONFIG_HAS_ITS=y

Hmm, that's been quite a number of revisions back, without things having
changed. Arm maintainers - what's the plan here? What use is it to test
an unsupported configuration (for years)?

But there's a more general aspect here: EXPERT is forced to Y here as
well, which is fine by itself. But it implies UNSUPPORTED also getting
enabled. That latter aspect is what I consider wrong for smoke flights
at least. Yet (as said) HAS_ITS depends on it (and its setting to Y by
the script would have no effect if UNSUPPORTED was off).

Jan