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 could not be run: >> test-arm64-arm64-examine 8 reboot fail REGR. vs. >> 161898 >> test-arm64-arm64-xl-thunderx 8 xen-boot fail REGR. vs. >> 161898 >> test-arm64-arm64-xl-credit1 8 xen-boot fail REGR. vs. >> 161898 >> test-arm64-arm64-xl-credit2 8 xen-boot fail REGR. vs. >> 161898 >> test-arm64-arm64-xl 8 xen-boot fail REGR. vs. >> 161898 > > I reported these on IRC, and Julien/Stefano have already committed a fix. > >> 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 this one by chance. > There are two issues. > > First, I have reverted bed7e6cad30 and edcfce55917. The XTF test is > correct, and they really do reintroduce XSA-286. It is a miracle of > timing that we don't need an XSA/CVE against Xen 4.15.
As expressed at the time already, I view this reverting you did, without there being any emergency and without you having gathered any acks or allowed for objections, as overstepping your competencies. I did post a patch to the XTF test, which I believe is wrong, without having had any feedback there either. Unless I hear back by the end of this week with substantial arguments of why I am wrong (which would need to also cover the fact that an issue was found with 32-bit PAE only, in turn supporting my view on the overall state), I intend to revert your revert early next week. Jan
