Xen project Mailing List

Re: [linux-linus test] 173480: regressions - FAIL

To: osstest service owner <osstest-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2022 08:18:59 +0200

Arc-authentication-results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=suse.com; dkim=pass header.d=suse.com; arc=none

Arc-message-signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=XfrW9xDO3p/KtxAA3jnh286ln62fMs6xCFkbcN3D4Ls=; b=SV3QRK/m/3nBNedBlI6NMQiniV+598NeFYYLOue+e/eVEaDMJLzjUpQhKVBEcTpwUUHC1sH7+tZcPpBLGo6lWND+LGhB4rDE9qVzgmMfGElhB7ezm8e34bVjRB44tvaJDLpsQ4rrUzrDQd+eJS4XmdvPFlBuj5ApTgyPxb6avelKJU5Q+oZD4iVv58i7TbuZ2dw6BoSjdwob3qtLKKW/9pJUjNDzqrTceMu3Q5+gU4A8PmVS6LuFkPiiO/P9t6YdzgskKsfk5tqrz3IQnGdmg3WUJNM3T3lB2IsXHReVyXXhyiBdPlsN3cwTVQPxOx2AYmTqvGV104mfuY7tNvTFDg==

Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=YcJzmQ9og4039wGM08mYGcQepv0Nwj2cFbjeL3i4LsJQ2Isw3Bp4Z82bbevFmZ0qd79fKa4/tiatRnDw9O8Kvo0BiLxUE+VjQ6vaqhYYrxvT9UlrafkElWv9Hl+pnJsNmoXSc59TFUlMO3Fz94Q3iEAq7TUkbXFxmI9l1fQWpqWRwGbEM7qQwZ98V89lmwifQhx7YiSvKpAreQyOiEIf3XFYvNmEVZTBLc/TBFbDkorbHAmYHqVvviu0JKpsA5+rZ1nKuR6pqEZcd2uPUoCzCAk8hFlaZSeuOoPtq/2U2Le/nXjNJhXPTPm6eTjpR4rL6x7SMmwuVuMkfUTz+P9w1A==

Authentication-results: dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;dmarc=none action=none header.from=suse.com;

Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Delivery-date: Mon, 10 Oct 2022 06:19:24 +0000

List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>

On 10.10.2022 04:26, osstest service owner wrote: > flight 173480 linux-linus real [real] > http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/173480/ > > Regressions :-( > > Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, > including tests which could not be run: > test-arm64-arm64-xl-seattle 8 xen-boot fail REGR. vs. > 173462 > test-arm64-arm64-xl-credit2 8 xen-boot fail REGR. vs. > 173462 > test-arm64-arm64-libvirt-xsm 8 xen-boot fail REGR. vs. > 173462 > test-arm64-arm64-xl-credit1 8 xen-boot fail REGR. vs. > 173462 > test-arm64-arm64-xl-vhd 8 xen-boot fail REGR. vs. > 173462 > test-armhf-armhf-xl-vhd 8 xen-boot fail REGR. vs. > 173462 > test-armhf-armhf-xl-credit2 8 xen-boot fail REGR. vs. > 173462 > test-armhf-armhf-xl-multivcpu 8 xen-boot fail REGR. vs. > 173462 > test-armhf-armhf-examine 8 reboot fail REGR. vs. > 173462 > test-armhf-armhf-libvirt-raw 8 xen-boot fail REGR. vs. > 173462 > test-armhf-armhf-xl 8 xen-boot fail REGR. vs. > 173462 > test-armhf-armhf-libvirt 8 xen-boot fail REGR. vs. > 173462 > test-armhf-armhf-xl-arndale 8 xen-boot fail REGR. vs. > 173462 Hmm, they can't find their volume groups. Since xen-unstable flights have been working afaics, is there perhaps a kernel Kconfig change needed (e.g. because of a newly present or split option)? Albeit then it's not really clear to me why only Arm would be affected - I assume basic arrangements like these match between x86 and Arm. Jan

©2013 Xen Project, A Linux Foundation Collaborative Project. All Rights Reserved.
Linux Foundation is a registered trademark of The Linux Foundation.
Xen Project is a trademark of The Linux Foundation.