Re: [Xen-devel] staging-4.6 seems to be broken

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 11.05.18 at 17:02, <ian.jackson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> osstest service owner writes ("[xen-4.6-testing test] 122657: regressions - 
> FAIL"):
>> flight 122657 xen-4.6-testing real [real]
>> http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/122657/ 
>> 
>> Regressions :-(
>> 
>> Tests which did not succeed and are blocking,
>> including tests which could not be run:
>>  test-xtf-amd64-amd64-2 50 xtf/test-hvm64-lbr-tsx-vmentry fail REGR. vs. 
>> 122461
>>  test-amd64-i386-libvirt 18 guest-start/debian.repeat fail REGR. vs. 122461
>>  test-amd64-i386-libvirt-xsm 18 guest-start/debian.repeat fail REGR. vs. 
>> 122461
>>  test-amd64-i386-libvirt-qemuu-debianhvm-amd64-xsm 16 
>> guest-start/debianhvm.repeat fail REGR. vs. 122461
>>  test-amd64-i386-xl-qemuu-debianhvm-amd64-shadow 16 guest-localmigrate/x10 
>> fail REGR. vs. 122461
>>  test-amd64-i386-xl-qemuu-ovmf-amd64 18 guest-start/debianhvm.repeat fail 
>> REGR. vs. 122461
> 
> At least some of these are surely real regressions.

Are you saying that just because of the amount of failures above, or
because of some observations from log files or alike? I'm asking because
122699 looks quite a bit better.

Jan



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel