On Fri, 2015-06-12 at 09:44 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote: > On Fri, 2015-06-12 at 11:42 +0800, Robert Hu wrote: > > Hi Ian J., because nested Xen isn't that matured at present; it is > > currently 'tech preview' phase. We now just add some sanity test case to > > defend current work fruits. We can add more complicated test cases later > > as nested Xen development moves forward. > > I don't think it needs doing as part of this series, but I do think it > would be worth adding the standard suite of tests steps to L2 guests > soon after. Agree. We can separately add those part in a later patch series. > > The way osstest deals with test failures i.e. classifying them into "has > always failed" vs. "regression" means that it is fine to add tests for > features which aren't mature yet, since they will fall into the "has > always failed" set and not block pushes. In fact it is in some sense > good to do this since it gives a concrete set of (necessary but not > necessarily sufficient) things which need to be fixed for the feature to > reach maturity. We would like this test job's failure to be marked 'regression', which shall block related breaking code's commitment. We can consider to contribute more code later, including proved/success test cases (which will fall into regression as this case), and fail test cases (which shall soon be fixed/developed). > > Ian. >
_______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
