On Tue, 2016-01-05 at 02:26 +0000, osstest service owner wrote: > flight 76919 xen-unstable real [real] > http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/76919/ > > Regressions :-( > > Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, > including tests which could not be run: > test-amd64-i386-xl-qemut-stubdom-debianhvm-amd64-xsm 9 debian-hvm-install > fail REGR. vs. 66879
ISTR someone (Wei?) at some point saying that a 32-bit stubdom (as used here) isn't actually something we wish to support. Shall we either drop this test altogether or mark it as allow? Or will someone investigate why it apparently can't find its disks. http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/results/history/test-amd64-i386-xl-qemut-stubdom-debianhvm-amd64-xsm/xen-unstable.html seems to suggest it has a very low probability of success (both merlot and italia failed dozens of times before passing) Nothing in the xen.git range bf925a9f1254..8e4d18e113c9 looks especially relevant. Bisection couldn't reproduce the basis pass: http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/results/bisect/xen-unstable/test-amd64-i386-xl-qemut-stubdom-debianhvm-amd64-xsm.debian-hvm-install.html Ian. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
