[Xen-devel] [xen-unstable test] 118916: regressions - FAIL

flight 118916 xen-unstable real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/118916/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: test-armhf-armhf-xl-credit2 16 guest-start/debian.repeat fail REGR. vs. 118698 Tests which did no

[Xen-devel] [linux-linus test] 118893: regressions - FAIL

flight 118893 linux-linus real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/118893/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: test-amd64-i386-libvirt 7 xen-boot fail REGR. vs. 118324 test-amd64-i386-xl-

[Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86/srat: fix the end pfn check in valid_numa_range()

... and fix the coding style on fly. valid_numa_range(..., epfn << PAGE_SHIFT, ...) and its only caller memory_add(..., epfn, pxm) interpret epfn inconsistently. The former interprets epfn as the last pfn, while the latter interprets it as the last pfn plus one. Fix this inconsistency in valid_num

Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC XEN PATCH v4 00/41] Add vNVDIMM support to HVM domains

On 02/09/18 12:33 +, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > Thanks for the series, I'm however wondering whether it's appropriate > to post a v4 as RFC. Ie: at v4 the reviewer expects the submitter to > have a clear picture of what needs to be implemented. > > On Thu, Dec 07, 2017 at 06:09:49PM +0800, Haozh

[Xen-devel] [qemu-mainline test] 118856: regressions - FAIL

flight 118856 qemu-mainline real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/118856/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: test-armhf-armhf-xl-credit2 16 guest-start/debian.repeat fail REGR. vs. 118670 test-amd64-amd64-

[Xen-devel] [seabios test] 118836: regressions - FAIL

flight 118836 seabios real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/118836/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: test-amd64-amd64-xl-qemuu-ws16-amd64 17 guest-stop fail REGR. vs. 115539 Tests which did not suc

[Xen-devel] [xen-4.8-testing test] 118818: tolerable FAIL - PUSHED

flight 118818 xen-4.8-testing real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/118818/ Failures :-/ but no regressions. Tests which did not succeed, but are not blocking: test-xtf-amd64-amd64-2 49 xtf/test-hvm64-lbr-tsx-vmentry fail like 118465 test-xtf-amd64-amd64-3 49 xt

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/2] xen: xenbus: WARN_ON XS_TRANSACTION_{START, END} misuse

On 02/10/2018 08:27 PM, Simon Gaiser wrote: Boris Ostrovsky: On 02/07/2018 05:22 PM, Simon Gaiser wrote: +users_old = xs_state_users; xs_state_users--; if ((req->type == XS_TRANSACTION_START && req->msg.type == XS_ERROR) || req->type == XS_TRANSACTION_END)

[Xen-devel] [libvirt test] 118829: tolerable all pass - PUSHED

flight 118829 libvirt real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/118829/ Failures :-/ but no regressions. Tests which did not succeed, but are not blocking: test-armhf-armhf-libvirt 14 saverestore-support-checkfail like 118735 test-armhf-armhf-libvirt-xsm 14 saveresto

[Xen-devel] [xen-unstable test] 118802: regressions - FAIL

flight 118802 xen-unstable real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/118802/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: test-amd64-amd64-xl-qemut-win7-amd64 16 guest-localmigrate/x10 fail REGR. vs. 118698 test-armhf-

[Xen-devel] [xen-unstable-coverity test] 118906: all pass - PUSHED

flight 118906 xen-unstable-coverity real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/118906/ Perfect :-) All tests in this flight passed as required version targeted for testing: xen c9d46c6fba9496478fa9f42c4bbebce8a191527d baseline version: xen 30cb