Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-unstable test] 77945: regressions - FAIL [and 2 more messages]

[Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, 2016-01-15 at 17:24 +0000, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 15/01/16 17:15, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > > > On 15.01.16 at 18:06, <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2016-01-14 at 16:27 +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > > > Â* I don't have a clear design proposal for the above but I think Doug
> > > > ÂÂÂcan probably provide one.ÂÂI'm hoping this is more a matter of
> > > > ÂÂÂthinking carefully than of extensive build system programming!
> > > I think we should:
> > > 
> > > 1) Move /usr/lib/debug/xen-4.7-unstable.config to /boot. I previously
> > > didn't care about what path it was, but the usecase of having grub be able
> > > to react to the config (see below) is a strong reason to have it in /boot
> > > IMHO. Jan has said he won't veto such a change, AFAICT everyone else is
> > > happy with it.
> > > 
> > > 2) Assume that grub (specifically the patch in 
> > > http://savannah.gnu.org/bugsÂ;
> > > /?43420 and as used by osstest today) will at some point be modified to
> > > look at /boot/xenconfig-$version to decide whether to create an XSM entry
> > > or not instead of the presence of /boot/xenpolicy-$version. This step
> > > belongs here logically but chronologically could come much later since
> > > osstest will do the right thing even if there is a spurious
> > > /boot/xenpolicy-$version file (which is to say it will ignore the spurious
> > > entry and boot the right thing).
> > > 
> > > 3) Have tools/* always build the FLASK+XSM tools _and_ the FLASK policy 
> > > and
> > > to always install both. Any related configure options can go away and we 
> > > no
> > > longer need to worry about synchronising the configuration of the tools 
> > > and
> > > xen trees, this is desirable because we would prefer to have one set of
> > > tools which gracefully handles differing hypervisor configurations over
> > > needing different sets of tools (FLASK+XSM was one of the few exceptions 
> > > to
> > > that rule AFAICT).
> > > 
> > > I think with this plan there is no need to modify osstest.git, since it
> > > already does the right thing (which is, it sets XSM for Xen builds, which
> > > in turn enables FLASK and it does nothing for tools/* which is correct 
> > > once
> > > #3 above has happened).
> > > 
> > > The only downside is a spurious /boot/xenpolicy-$version installed when 
> > > the
> > > corresponding Xen binary doesn't support XSM, however given the assumption
> > > in #2 (which implies the user will never see a spurious grub entry, which
> > > is the important thing) and the fact that it avoids the complexity of
> > > having tools/* rely in some way on xen/.config I think that is a 
> > > worthwhile
> > > trade-off.
> > > 
> > > Hopefully this simplifies a bunch of the arguments we have been having and
> > > provides a path forwards?
> > > 
> > > Objections?
> > My opinion on 1 and 2 is known; 3 seems like a good step to me.
> 
> FWIW, I also prefer option 3.ÂÂIt lends itself better to a toolstack
> which functions in the same way, irrespective of hypervisor configuration.

To be clear: These are not options, they are steps in a plan, to be
followed in order.

Ian.


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel