Re: xen | Failed pipeline for staging | b819bd65

[Federico Serafini <federico.serafini@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 30/04/24 11:00, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 30.04.2024 10:03, GitLab wrote:
> > Pipeline #1272869158 has failed!
> >
> > Project: xen ( https://gitlab.com/xen-project/hardware/xen )
> > Branch: staging ( https://gitlab.com/xen-project/hardware/xen/-/commits/staging 
> > )
> >
> > Commit: b819bd65 ( 
> > https://gitlab.com/xen-project/hardware/xen/-/commit/b819bd65f4fb25be582f66ba2e4134f61d86f459
> >  )
> > Commit Message: revert "x86/mm: re-implement get_page_light() u...
> > Commit Author: Jan Beulich ( https://gitlab.com/jbeulich )
> >
> >
> > Pipeline #1272869158 ( 
> > https://gitlab.com/xen-project/hardware/xen/-/pipelines/1272869158 ) triggered 
> > by Jan Beulich ( https://gitlab.com/jbeulich )
> > had 3 failed jobs.
> >
> > Job #6745823842 ( 
> > https://gitlab.com/xen-project/hardware/xen/-/jobs/6745823842/raw )
> >
> > Stage: test
> > Name: adl-pci-hvm-x86-64-gcc-debug
> > Job #6745823720 ( 
> > https://gitlab.com/xen-project/hardware/xen/-/jobs/6745823720/raw )
> >
> > Stage: analyze
> > Name: eclair-x86_64
> This flags start_nested_{svm,vmx}() as regressions, when the regression was
> previously spotted already. Is that intended? I.e. shouldn't the comparison
> be to the previous pipeline run, such that issues are pointed out only for
> what is actually being added anew with the patch / batch under test?
>
> > Job #6745823721 ( 
> > https://gitlab.com/xen-project/hardware/xen/-/jobs/6745823721/raw )
> >
> > Stage: analyze
> > Name: eclair-ARM64
> Similarly this appears to point out regressions which were previously spotted.
A patch to make ECLAIR analysis *not* allowed to fail has been sent.
It will also solve the issue you are pointing out.
Thanks for reporting it.

--
Federico Serafini, M.Sc.

Software Engineer, BUGSENG (http://bugseng.com)