On 26.11.19 10:08, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 09:30:47AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 25.11.2019 18:49, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 05:34:15PM +, Andrew Cooper wrote:
On 25/11/2019 17:27, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 05:07:04PM +00
On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 09:30:47AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 25.11.2019 18:49, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 05:34:15PM +, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> >> On 25/11/2019 17:27, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 05:07:04PM +, Wei Liu wrote:
> On Mo
On 25.11.2019 18:49, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 05:34:15PM +, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> On 25/11/2019 17:27, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
>>> On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 05:07:04PM +, Wei Liu wrote:
On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 04:59:31PM +0100, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
[...]
On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 05:34:15PM +, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 25/11/2019 17:27, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 05:07:04PM +, Wei Liu wrote:
> >> On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 04:59:31PM +0100, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> >> [...]
> >>> Which I think it's expected, we already kn
On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 05:34:15PM +, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 25/11/2019 17:27, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 05:07:04PM +, Wei Liu wrote:
> >> On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 04:59:31PM +0100, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> >> [...]
> >>> Which I think it's expected, we already kn
On 25/11/2019 17:27, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 05:07:04PM +, Wei Liu wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 04:59:31PM +0100, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
>> [...]
>>> Which I think it's expected, we already knew clang had a lot of
>>> duplicate symbols. The only way I know to worka
On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 05:07:04PM +, Wei Liu wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 04:59:31PM +0100, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> [...]
> >
> > Which I think it's expected, we already knew clang had a lot of
> > duplicate symbols. The only way I know to workaround this ATM is to
> > use `gmake xen cla
On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 04:59:31PM +0100, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
[...]
>
> Which I think it's expected, we already knew clang had a lot of
> duplicate symbols. The only way I know to workaround this ATM is to
> use `gmake xen clang=y CONFIG_ENFORCE_UNIQUE_SYMBOLS=n`. It's on my
> pile of stuff to
On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 02:06:06PM +, Wei Liu wrote:
> Cc Roger -- you're our resident Clang expert. :-)
>
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 08:02:17AM -0600, Doug Goldstein wrote:
> > On 11/21/19 12:05 AM, Jürgen Groß wrote:
> >
> > > Where do we stand with Xen 4.13 regarding blockers and related pa
On 25.11.2019 15:02, Doug Goldstein wrote:
> 2. The hypervisor currently fails to build with clang using versions
> that READM says are supported no matter the configuration.
Did you post any details of this anywhere?
Jan
___
Xen-devel mailing list
Xe
Cc Roger -- you're our resident Clang expert. :-)
On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 08:02:17AM -0600, Doug Goldstein wrote:
> On 11/21/19 12:05 AM, Jürgen Groß wrote:
>
> > Where do we stand with Xen 4.13 regarding blockers and related patches?
> >
> 1. Currently the default "make install" fails with erro
On 11/21/19 12:05 AM, Jürgen Groß wrote:
Where do we stand with Xen 4.13 regarding blockers and related patches?
1. Currently the default "make install" fails with errors in
tools/tests/x86_emulator if you don't have a new enough GCC. Causing
failures on distros that are considered still supp
On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 9:38 AM Andrew Cooper wrote:
>
> On 21/11/2019 17:31, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 20, 2019 at 10:06 PM Jürgen Groß wrote:
> >> Where do we stand with Xen 4.13 regarding blockers and related patches?
> >>
> >> 1. OSStest failure regarding nested test:
> >> I
On Nov 21, 2019, at 17:11, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 11:39:14AM -0800, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
>>> On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 9:38 AM Andrew Cooper
>>> wrote:
>>> On 21/11/2019 17:31, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 20, 2019 at 10:06 PM Jürgen Groß
On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 11:39:14AM -0800, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 9:38 AM Andrew Cooper
> wrote:
> >
> > On 21/11/2019 17:31, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 20, 2019 at 10:06 PM Jürgen Groß wrote:
> > >> Where do we stand with Xen 4.13 regarding blockers and
On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 9:38 AM Andrew Cooper wrote:
>
> On 21/11/2019 17:31, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 20, 2019 at 10:06 PM Jürgen Groß wrote:
> >> Where do we stand with Xen 4.13 regarding blockers and related patches?
> >>
> >> 1. OSStest failure regarding nested test:
> >> I
On 21/11/2019 17:31, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 20, 2019 at 10:06 PM Jürgen Groß wrote:
>> Where do we stand with Xen 4.13 regarding blockers and related patches?
>>
>> 1. OSStest failure regarding nested test:
>> I'm not quite sure whether the currently debated patch of Andrew is
>
On Wed, Nov 20, 2019 at 10:06 PM Jürgen Groß wrote:
>
> Where do we stand with Xen 4.13 regarding blockers and related patches?
>
> 1. OSStest failure regarding nested test:
> I'm not quite sure whether the currently debated patch of Andrew is
> fixing the problem. If not, do we know what
On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 4:16 PM Ian Jackson wrote:
>
> Wei Liu writes ("Re: Status of 4.13"):
> > FWIW I've pushed all the toolstack patches that I'm aware of.
>
> The only thing outstanding that I am aware of is
> [PATCH for-4.13 v1 1/2] libxl: introduce new backend type VINPUT
> of which I am a
On 21.11.2019 17:03, George Dunlap wrote:
>
>
>> On Nov 21, 2019, at 3:34 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>
>> On 21.11.2019 16:20, George Dunlap wrote:
>>>
>>>
On Nov 21, 2019, at 8:41 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 21.11.2019 08:36, Jürgen Groß wrote:
> On 21.11.19 08:30, Steven Haigh w
On 21.11.2019 17:20, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> "xen/vcpu: Sanitise VCPUOP_initialise call hierachy". This is XSA-296
> followup and RFC for-4.13 with no comments for/against. This has also
> stalled with no acks, no concrete suggestion for changes or ways forward.
On the 4th I replied
"I can see t
On 21/11/2019 06:05, Jürgen Groß wrote:
> Where do we stand with Xen 4.13 regarding blockers and related patches?
>
> 1. OSStest failure regarding nested test:
> I'm not quite sure whether the currently debated patch of Andrew is
> fixing the problem. If not, do we know what is missing or how
> On Nov 21, 2019, at 3:34 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>
> On 21.11.2019 16:20, George Dunlap wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On Nov 21, 2019, at 8:41 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>
>>> On 21.11.2019 08:36, Jürgen Groß wrote:
On 21.11.19 08:30, Steven Haigh wrote:
> On 2019-11-21 17:05, Jürgen Groß wrote:
On 21.11.2019 16:20, George Dunlap wrote:
>
>
>> On Nov 21, 2019, at 8:41 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>
>> On 21.11.2019 08:36, Jürgen Groß wrote:
>>> On 21.11.19 08:30, Steven Haigh wrote:
On 2019-11-21 17:05, Jürgen Groß wrote:
> Where do we stand with Xen 4.13 regarding blockers and rela
> On Nov 21, 2019, at 8:41 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>
> On 21.11.2019 08:36, Jürgen Groß wrote:
>> On 21.11.19 08:30, Steven Haigh wrote:
>>> On 2019-11-21 17:05, Jürgen Groß wrote:
Where do we stand with Xen 4.13 regarding blockers and related patches?
2. Ryzen/Rome failures with
Wei Liu writes ("Re: Status of 4.13"):
> FWIW I've pushed all the toolstack patches that I'm aware of.
The only thing outstanding that I am aware of is
[PATCH for-4.13 v1 1/2] libxl: introduce new backend type VINPUT
of which I am awaiting a respin from Oleksandr Grytsov (in the To).
There is a
On Thu, 21 Nov 2019 at 06:05, Jürgen Groß wrote:
[...]
> 4. Are there any blockers for 4.13 other than 1. and 2. (apart of any
> pending XSAs)?
>
FWIW I've pushed all the toolstack patches that I'm aware of.
Wei.
>
> Juergen
___
Xen-devel mailing
On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 09:53:44AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 21.11.2019 07:05, Jürgen Groß wrote:
> > Where do we stand with Xen 4.13 regarding blockers and related patches?
> >
> > 1. OSStest failure regarding nested test:
> > I'm not quite sure whether the currently debated patch of And
On 21.11.2019 07:05, Jürgen Groß wrote:
> Where do we stand with Xen 4.13 regarding blockers and related patches?
>
> 1. OSStest failure regarding nested test:
> I'm not quite sure whether the currently debated patch of Andrew is
> fixing the problem. If not, do we know what is missing or
On 21.11.2019 08:36, Jürgen Groß wrote:
> On 21.11.19 08:30, Steven Haigh wrote:
>> On 2019-11-21 17:05, Jürgen Groß wrote:
>>> Where do we stand with Xen 4.13 regarding blockers and related patches?
>>>
>>> 2. Ryzen/Rome failures with Windows guests:
>>> What is the currently planned way to add
On 21.11.19 08:30, Steven Haigh wrote:
On 2019-11-21 17:05, Jürgen Groß wrote:
Where do we stand with Xen 4.13 regarding blockers and related patches?
2. Ryzen/Rome failures with Windows guests:
What is the currently planned way to address the problem? Who is
working on that?
A workarou
On 2019-11-21 17:05, Jürgen Groß wrote:
Where do we stand with Xen 4.13 regarding blockers and related patches?
2. Ryzen/Rome failures with Windows guests:
What is the currently planned way to address the problem? Who is
working on that?
A workaround was found by specifying cpuid values
32 matches
Mail list logo
