(I thought I'd hit send on this already, sorry if it is a repeat)
On Fri, 2015-05-22 at 10:17 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Thu, 2015-05-21 at 18:05 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > Assuming this flight produces something useful (i.e. a pass) then I'll
> > look into a bisect.
>
> With this and a
On Thu, 2015-05-21 at 16:24 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> Figuring this out will probably involve a few adhoc test runs to
> establish some baselines and then taking it from there.
I've kicked off an adhoc test (hopefully correctly) of v3.14 using the
template failure from flight 31795. It's easies
On Thu, 2015-05-21 at 15:58 +0200, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> El 21/05/15 a les 4.40, osstest service user ha escrit:
> > flight 56810 linux-next real [real]
> > http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/56810/
> >
> > Regressions :-(
> >
> > Tests which did not succeed and are blocking,
> >
El 21/05/15 a les 4.40, osstest service user ha escrit:
> flight 56810 linux-next real [real]
> http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/56810/
>
> Regressions :-(
>
> Tests which did not succeed and are blocking,
> including tests which could not be run:
> test-amd64-i386-rumpuserxen-i3
flight 56810 linux-next real [real]
http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/56810/
Regressions :-(
Tests which did not succeed and are blocking,
including tests which could not be run:
test-amd64-i386-rumpuserxen-i386 15
rumpuserxen-demo-xenstorels/xenstorels.repeat fail REGR. vs. 5671
