On 17.06.2021 15:05, Ian Jackson wrote:
> On to process:
>
> Jan Beulich writes ("Re: Regressed XSA-286, was [xen-unstable test] 161917:
> regressions - FAIL"):
>> On 16.06.2021 17:43, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>> I am very irritated that you have
On Thu, 17 Jun 2021, Jan Beulich wrote:
> GitlabCI doesn't tell me anything just yet, unless I go actively poll
> it. And as mentioned just yesterday on irc, I don't think I can easily
> navigate my way through those web pages, to find breakage I may have
> introduced and hence would better go fix.
On 17.06.2021 16:49, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Jan Beulich writes ("Re: Regressed XSA-286, was [xen-unstable test] 161917:
> regressions - FAIL"):
>> If any OS made such an assumption, then I don't think it would be
>> a vulnerability either. It would simply be a gu
Jan Beulich writes ("Re: Regressed XSA-286, was [xen-unstable test] 161917:
regressions - FAIL"):
> If any OS made such an assumption, then I don't think it would be
> a vulnerability either. It would simply be a guest kernel bug then.
For the avoidance of doubt:
I think y
On 17.06.2021 15:05, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Firstly, let me try to deal with substance and/or technical merit.
>
> Jan, I am finding it difficult to follow in your message whether you
> are asserting that your disputed change (to Xen) did not introduce a
> vulnerability.
>
> I think you are saying
vulnerability.
On to process:
Jan Beulich writes ("Re: Regressed XSA-286, was [xen-unstable test] 161917:
regressions - FAIL"):
> On 16.06.2021 17:43, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> > I am very irritated that you have *twice* recently introduced security
> > vulnerabilities
On 16.06.2021 17:43, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 16/06/2021 09:48, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 13.05.2021 22:15, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>> On 13/05/2021 04:56, osstest service owner wrote:
flight 161917 xen-unstable real [real]
http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/161917/
On 16/06/2021 09:48, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 13.05.2021 22:15, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> On 13/05/2021 04:56, osstest service owner wrote:
>>> flight 161917 xen-unstable real [real]
>>> http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/161917/
>>>
>>> Regressions :-(
>>>
>>> Tests which did not succee
On 13.05.2021 22:15, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 13/05/2021 04:56, osstest service owner wrote:
>> flight 161917 xen-unstable real [real]
>> http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/161917/
>>
>> Regressions :-(
>>
>> Tests which did not succeed and are blocking,
>> including tests which coul
On 17.05.2021 10:43, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 13.05.2021 22:15, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> Second, the unexplained OSSTest behaviour.
>>
>> When I repro'd this on pinot1, test-pv32pae-xsa-286 failing was totally
>> deterministic and repeatable (I tried 100 times because the test is a
>> fraction of a s
On 13.05.2021 22:15, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 13/05/2021 04:56, osstest service owner wrote:
>> Tests which are failing intermittently (not blocking):
>> test-xtf-amd64-amd64-3 92 xtf/test-pv32pae-xsa-286 fail in 161909 pass in
>> 161917
>
> While noticing the ARM issue above, I also spotted th
On 13/05/2021 04:56, osstest service owner wrote:
> flight 161917 xen-unstable real [real]
> http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/161917/
>
> Regressions :-(
>
> Tests which did not succeed and are blocking,
> including tests which could not be run:
> test-arm64-arm64-examine 8 re
12 matches
Mail list logo
