On 06.09.2024 12:07, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 06/09/2024 11:01 am, Andrew Cooper wrote: >> On 06/09/2024 7:08 am, Jan Beulich wrote: >>> On 06.09.2024 06:41, osstest service owner wrote: >>>> flight 187507 xen-unstable real [real] >>>> http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/187507/ >>>> >>>> Regressions :-( >>>> >>>> Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, >>>> including tests which could not be run: >>>> build-i386-xsm 6 xen-build fail REGR. vs. >>>> 187498 >>>> build-i386 6 xen-build fail REGR. vs. >>>> 187498 >>> This is a result of "x86emul: introduce a struct cpu_policy * local in >>> x86_emulate()", and me not noticing the issue because in my tree (for >>> AMX in particular) I have several more uses of the variable. I'd really >>> like to avoid undoing the change, but adding __maybe_unused also seems >>> bogus to me, as does adding a seemingly stray (void)cp somewhere. Good >>> alternative ideas, anyone? >> __maybe_unused as at least accurate, and its less fragile than a (void)cp; > > Interestingly, Gitlab's x86_32 build test missed this. > > https://gitlab.com/xen-project/people/andyhhp/xen/-/jobs/7762103169 passed. > > I wonder if there's anything we should have done to get better coverage.
>From the build log: make -C x86_emulator install make[6]: Entering directory '/builds/xen-project/people/andyhhp/xen/tools/tests/x86_emulator' make[6]: Nothing to be done for 'install'. make[6]: Leaving directory '/builds/xen-project/people/andyhhp/xen/tools/tests/x86_emulator' Iirc one of your colleagues (Alejandro?) had a patch to actually install the test harness binary. I didn't like this very much, but the above may be a good reason to have it despite my slight dislike. And I think I had indicated already that if everyone else thinks this wants installing, so be it. Jan
