On 30.04.2024 10:03, GitLab wrote:
>
>
> Pipeline #1272869158 has failed!
>
> Project: xen ( https://gitlab.com/xen-project/hardware/xen )
> Branch: staging (
> https://gitlab.com/xen-project/hardware/xen/-/commits/staging )
>
> Commit: b819bd65 (
> https://gitlab.com/xen-project/hardware/xen/-/commit/b819bd65f4fb25be582f66ba2e4134f61d86f459
> )
> Commit Message: revert "x86/mm: re-implement get_page_light() u...
> Commit Author: Jan Beulich ( https://gitlab.com/jbeulich )
>
>
> Pipeline #1272869158 (
> https://gitlab.com/xen-project/hardware/xen/-/pipelines/1272869158 )
> triggered by Jan Beulich ( https://gitlab.com/jbeulich )
> had 3 failed jobs.
>
> Job #6745823842 (
> https://gitlab.com/xen-project/hardware/xen/-/jobs/6745823842/raw )
>
> Stage: test
> Name: adl-pci-hvm-x86-64-gcc-debug
> Job #6745823720 (
> https://gitlab.com/xen-project/hardware/xen/-/jobs/6745823720/raw )
>
> Stage: analyze
> Name: eclair-x86_64
This flags start_nested_{svm,vmx}() as regressions, when the regression was
previously spotted already. Is that intended? I.e. shouldn't the comparison
be to the previous pipeline run, such that issues are pointed out only for
what is actually being added anew with the patch / batch under test?
> Job #6745823721 (
> https://gitlab.com/xen-project/hardware/xen/-/jobs/6745823721/raw )
>
> Stage: analyze
> Name: eclair-ARM64
Similarly this appears to point out regressions which were previously spotted.
Jan
