thr3ads.net - Xen devel - [xen-unstable bisection] complete test-amd64-amd64-xl-win7-amd64 [Jun 2012]

If this information is useful, please help other people find it:
Share via:

xen.org

2012-Jun-20 02:40 UTC

[xen-unstable bisection] complete test-amd64-amd64-xl-win7-amd64

branch xen-unstable
xen branch xen-unstable
job test-amd64-amd64-xl-win7-amd64
test windows-install

Tree: linux git://xenbits.xen.org/linux-pvops.git
Tree: qemu git://xenbits.xen.org/staging/qemu-xen-unstable.git
Tree: qemuu git://xenbits.xen.org/staging/qemu-upstream-unstable.git
Tree: xen http://xenbits.xen.org/staging/xen-unstable.hg

*** Found and reproduced problem changeset ***

  Bug is in tree:  xen http://xenbits.xen.org/staging/xen-unstable.hg
  Bug introduced:  9d1fd58ff602
  Bug not present: 32034d1914a6


  changeset:   25468:9d1fd58ff602
  user:        Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com>
  date:        Fri Jun 08 15:26:01 2012 +0100
      
      xl: check for meaningful combination of sedf config file parameters
      
      As it happens in the implementation of `xl sched-sedf -d ...'',
some
      consistency checking is needed for the scheduling parameters when
      they come from the config file.
      
      Signed-off-by: Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com>
      Acked-by: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>
      Acked-by: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com>
      Committed-by: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>
      
      


For bisection revision-tuple graph see:
  
http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~xensrcts/results/bisect.xen-unstable.test-amd64-amd64-xl-win7-amd64.windows-install.html
Revision IDs in each graph node refer, respectively, to the Trees above.

----------------------------------------
Searching for failure / basis pass:
 13088 fail [host=leaf-beetle] / 13025 ok.
Failure / basis pass flights: 13088 / 13025
Tree: linux git://xenbits.xen.org/linux-pvops.git
Tree: qemu git://xenbits.xen.org/staging/qemu-xen-unstable.git
Tree: qemuu git://xenbits.xen.org/staging/qemu-upstream-unstable.git
Tree: xen http://xenbits.xen.org/staging/xen-unstable.hg
Latest a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00
50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff
f7f8c33cd49885d69efc2e5f7f9a613d631762e2 5b6a857411ba
Basis pass a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00
50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff
6d8b472233779c2a028a03843603030d2b1aee86 32034d1914a6
Generating revisions with ./adhoc-revtuple-generator 
git://xenbits.xen.org/linux-pvops.git#a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00-a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00
git://xenbits.xen.org/staging/qemu-xen-unstable.git#50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff-50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff
git://xenbits.xen.org/staging/qemu-upstream-unstable.git#6d8b472233779c2a028a03843603030d2b1aee86-f7f8c33cd49885d69efc2e5f7f9a613d631762e2
http://xenbits.xen.org/staging/xen-unstable.hg#32034d1914a6-5b6a857411ba
using cache /export/home/osstest/repos/git-cache...
using cache /export/home/osstest/repos/git-cache...
locked cache /export/home/osstest/repos/git-cache...
processing ./cacheing-git clone --bare
git://xenbits.xen.org/staging/qemu-upstream-unstable.git
/export/home/osstest/repos/qemu-upstream-unstable...
Initialized empty Git repository in
/export/home/osstest/repos/qemu-upstream-unstable/
updating cache /export/home/osstest/repos/git-cache qemu-upstream-unstable...
pulling from ssh://xen@xenbits.xen.org/HG/staging/xen-unstable.hg
searching for changes
no changes found
using cache /export/home/osstest/repos/git-cache...
using cache /export/home/osstest/repos/git-cache...
locked cache /export/home/osstest/repos/git-cache...
processing ./cacheing-git clone --bare
git://xenbits.xen.org/staging/qemu-upstream-unstable.git
/export/home/osstest/repos/qemu-upstream-unstable...
Initialized empty Git repository in
/export/home/osstest/repos/qemu-upstream-unstable/
updating cache /export/home/osstest/repos/git-cache qemu-upstream-unstable...
pulling from ssh://xen@xenbits.xen.org/HG/staging/xen-unstable.hg
searching for changes
no changes found
Loaded 1021 nodes in revision graph
Searching for test results:
 13019 pass irrelevant
 12958 pass irrelevant
 13004 pass irrelevant
 13027 fail a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00
50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff
6d8b472233779c2a028a03843603030d2b1aee86 a70b35deb2b5
 12981 pass irrelevant
 12960 pass irrelevant
 12964 pass irrelevant
 13038 []
 12967 pass irrelevant
 12968 pass irrelevant
 12969 pass irrelevant
 12971 pass irrelevant
 12972 pass irrelevant
 12975 pass irrelevant
 12976 pass irrelevant
 12977 pass irrelevant
 12988 pass irrelevant
 12978 pass irrelevant
 13020 pass irrelevant
 12979 pass irrelevant
 12995 pass irrelevant
 12980 pass irrelevant
 12996 pass irrelevant
 13006 pass irrelevant
 12997 pass irrelevant
 12998 pass irrelevant
 13023 pass irrelevant
 13012 pass irrelevant
 13051 fail irrelevant
 12999 pass irrelevant
 13013 pass irrelevant
 13002 pass irrelevant
 13024 pass a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00
50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff
6d8b472233779c2a028a03843603030d2b1aee86 32034d1914a6
 13003 pass irrelevant
 13014 pass irrelevant
 13045 []
 13015 pass irrelevant
 13025 pass a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00
50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff
6d8b472233779c2a028a03843603030d2b1aee86 32034d1914a6
 13016 pass irrelevant
 13026 fail a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00
50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff
6d8b472233779c2a028a03843603030d2b1aee86 a70b35deb2b5
 13018 pass irrelevant
 13032 fail a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00
50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff
6d8b472233779c2a028a03843603030d2b1aee86 a70b35deb2b5
 13046 []
 13037 []
 13053 fail irrelevant
 13061 fail irrelevant
 13069 fail irrelevant
 13099 fail a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00
50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff
f7f8c33cd49885d69efc2e5f7f9a613d631762e2 5b6a857411ba
 13102 fail a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00
50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff
6d8b472233779c2a028a03843603030d2b1aee86 9d1fd58ff602
 13103 pass a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00
50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff
6d8b472233779c2a028a03843603030d2b1aee86 32034d1914a6
 13075 fail irrelevant
 13105 fail a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00
50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff
6d8b472233779c2a028a03843603030d2b1aee86 9d1fd58ff602
 13080 fail irrelevant
 13087 pass a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00
50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff
6d8b472233779c2a028a03843603030d2b1aee86 32034d1914a6
 13092 fail irrelevant
 13093 fail a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00
50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff
6d8b472233779c2a028a03843603030d2b1aee86 5b61b5779fca
 13094 fail a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00
50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff
6d8b472233779c2a028a03843603030d2b1aee86 4d40d7a4c6f1
 13095 fail a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00
50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff
6d8b472233779c2a028a03843603030d2b1aee86 9d1fd58ff602
 13088 fail a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00
50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff
f7f8c33cd49885d69efc2e5f7f9a613d631762e2 5b6a857411ba
 13096 pass a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00
50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff
6d8b472233779c2a028a03843603030d2b1aee86 32034d1914a6
Searching for interesting versions
 Result found: flight 13024 (pass), for basis pass
 Result found: flight 13088 (fail), for basis failure
 Repro found: flight 13096 (pass), for basis pass
 Repro found: flight 13099 (fail), for basis failure
 0 revisions at a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00
50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff
6d8b472233779c2a028a03843603030d2b1aee86 32034d1914a6
No revisions left to test, checking graph state.
 Result found: flight 13024 (pass), for last pass
 Result found: flight 13095 (fail), for first failure
 Repro found: flight 13096 (pass), for last pass
 Repro found: flight 13102 (fail), for first failure
 Repro found: flight 13103 (pass), for last pass
 Repro found: flight 13105 (fail), for first failure

*** Found and reproduced problem changeset ***

  Bug is in tree:  xen http://xenbits.xen.org/staging/xen-unstable.hg
  Bug introduced:  9d1fd58ff602
  Bug not present: 32034d1914a6

pulling from ssh://xen@xenbits.xen.org/HG/staging/xen-unstable.hg
searching for changes
no changes found

  changeset:   25468:9d1fd58ff602
  user:        Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com>
  date:        Fri Jun 08 15:26:01 2012 +0100
      
      xl: check for meaningful combination of sedf config file parameters
      
      As it happens in the implementation of `xl sched-sedf -d ...'',
some
      consistency checking is needed for the scheduling parameters when
      they come from the config file.
      
      Signed-off-by: Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com>
      Acked-by: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>
      Acked-by: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com>
      Committed-by: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>
      
      

Revision graph left in
/home/xc_osstest/results/bisect.xen-unstable.test-amd64-amd64-xl-win7-amd64.windows-install.{dot,ps,png,html}.
----------------------------------------
13105: tolerable ALL FAIL

flight 13105 xen-unstable real-bisect [real]
http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~xensrcts/logs/13105/

Failures :-/ but no regressions.

Tests which did not succeed,
including tests which could not be run:
 test-amd64-amd64-xl-win7-amd64  7 windows-install       fail baseline untested


jobs:
 test-amd64-amd64-xl-win7-amd64                               fail    


------------------------------------------------------------
sg-report-flight on woking.cam.xci-test.com
logs: /home/xc_osstest/logs
images: /home/xc_osstest/images

Logs, config files, etc. are available at
    http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~xensrcts/logs

Test harness code can be found at
    http://xenbits.xensource.com/gitweb?p=osstest.git;a=summary

Jan Beulich

2012-Jun-20 07:51 UTC

head link

Re: [xen-unstable bisection] complete test-amd64-amd64-xl-win7-amd64

>>> On 20.06.12 at 04:40, xen.org <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>
wrote:
> branch xen-unstable
> xen branch xen-unstable
> job test-amd64-amd64-xl-win7-amd64
> test windows-install
> 
> Tree: linux git://xenbits.xen.org/linux-pvops.git
> Tree: qemu git://xenbits.xen.org/staging/qemu-xen-unstable.git
> Tree: qemuu git://xenbits.xen.org/staging/qemu-upstream-unstable.git
> Tree: xen http://xenbits.xen.org/staging/xen-unstable.hg 
> 
> *** Found and reproduced problem changeset ***
> 
>   Bug is in tree:  xen http://xenbits.xen.org/staging/xen-unstable.hg 
>   Bug introduced:  9d1fd58ff602
>   Bug not present: 32034d1914a6
> 
> 
>   changeset:   25468:9d1fd58ff602
>   user:        Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com>
>   date:        Fri Jun 08 15:26:01 2012 +0100
>       
>       xl: check for meaningful combination of sedf config file parameters
Dario,

these bisection results have been posted for a couple of days,
yet so far I don''t recall having seen any sign from you as to what
you''re plans are. Given that this has now been holding up a push
for over 10 days, I think I''ll have to request reverting the change
otherwise.

Jan
>       As it happens in the implementation of `xl sched-sedf -d
...'', some
>       consistency checking is needed for the scheduling parameters when
>       they come from the config file.
>       
>       Signed-off-by: Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com>
>       Acked-by: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>
>       Acked-by: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com>
>       Committed-by: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>
>       
>       
> 
> 
> For bisection revision-tuple graph see:
>    
>
http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~xensrcts/results/bisect.xen-unstable.test-
> amd64-amd64-xl-win7-amd64.windows-install.html
> Revision IDs in each graph node refer, respectively, to the Trees above.
> 
> ----------------------------------------
> Searching for failure / basis pass:
>  13088 fail [host=leaf-beetle] / 13025 ok.
> Failure / basis pass flights: 13088 / 13025
> Tree: linux git://xenbits.xen.org/linux-pvops.git
> Tree: qemu git://xenbits.xen.org/staging/qemu-xen-unstable.git
> Tree: qemuu git://xenbits.xen.org/staging/qemu-upstream-unstable.git
> Tree: xen http://xenbits.xen.org/staging/xen-unstable.hg 
> Latest a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00 
> 50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff 
> f7f8c33cd49885d69efc2e5f7f9a613d631762e2 5b6a857411ba
> Basis pass a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00 
> 50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff 
> 6d8b472233779c2a028a03843603030d2b1aee86 32034d1914a6
> Generating revisions with ./adhoc-revtuple-generator  
>
git://xenbits.xen.org/linux-pvops.git#a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00-
> a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00 
>
git://xenbits.xen.org/staging/qemu-xen-unstable.git#50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0
> aae98709ca9ffff-50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff 
>
git://xenbits.xen.org/staging/qemu-upstream-unstable.git#6d8b472233779c2a028a03
> 843603030d2b1aee86-f7f8c33cd49885d69efc2e5f7f9a613d631762e2 
> http://xenbits.xen.org/staging/xen-unstable.hg#32034d1914a6-5b6a857411ba 
> using cache /export/home/osstest/repos/git-cache...
> using cache /export/home/osstest/repos/git-cache...
> locked cache /export/home/osstest/repos/git-cache...
> processing ./cacheing-git clone --bare 
> git://xenbits.xen.org/staging/qemu-upstream-unstable.git 
> /export/home/osstest/repos/qemu-upstream-unstable...
> Initialized empty Git repository in 
> /export/home/osstest/repos/qemu-upstream-unstable/
> updating cache /export/home/osstest/repos/git-cache
qemu-upstream-unstable...
> pulling from ssh://xen@xenbits.xen.org/HG/staging/xen-unstable.hg
> searching for changes
> no changes found
> using cache /export/home/osstest/repos/git-cache...
> using cache /export/home/osstest/repos/git-cache...
> locked cache /export/home/osstest/repos/git-cache...
> processing ./cacheing-git clone --bare 
> git://xenbits.xen.org/staging/qemu-upstream-unstable.git 
> /export/home/osstest/repos/qemu-upstream-unstable...
> Initialized empty Git repository in 
> /export/home/osstest/repos/qemu-upstream-unstable/
> updating cache /export/home/osstest/repos/git-cache
qemu-upstream-unstable...
> pulling from ssh://xen@xenbits.xen.org/HG/staging/xen-unstable.hg
> searching for changes
> no changes found
> Loaded 1021 nodes in revision graph
> Searching for test results:
>  13019 pass irrelevant
>  12958 pass irrelevant
>  13004 pass irrelevant
>  13027 fail a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00 
> 50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff 
> 6d8b472233779c2a028a03843603030d2b1aee86 a70b35deb2b5
>  12981 pass irrelevant
>  12960 pass irrelevant
>  12964 pass irrelevant
>  13038 []
>  12967 pass irrelevant
>  12968 pass irrelevant
>  12969 pass irrelevant
>  12971 pass irrelevant
>  12972 pass irrelevant
>  12975 pass irrelevant
>  12976 pass irrelevant
>  12977 pass irrelevant
>  12988 pass irrelevant
>  12978 pass irrelevant
>  13020 pass irrelevant
>  12979 pass irrelevant
>  12995 pass irrelevant
>  12980 pass irrelevant
>  12996 pass irrelevant
>  13006 pass irrelevant
>  12997 pass irrelevant
>  12998 pass irrelevant
>  13023 pass irrelevant
>  13012 pass irrelevant
>  13051 fail irrelevant
>  12999 pass irrelevant
>  13013 pass irrelevant
>  13002 pass irrelevant
>  13024 pass a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00 
> 50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff 
> 6d8b472233779c2a028a03843603030d2b1aee86 32034d1914a6
>  13003 pass irrelevant
>  13014 pass irrelevant
>  13045 []
>  13015 pass irrelevant
>  13025 pass a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00 
> 50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff 
> 6d8b472233779c2a028a03843603030d2b1aee86 32034d1914a6
>  13016 pass irrelevant
>  13026 fail a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00 
> 50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff 
> 6d8b472233779c2a028a03843603030d2b1aee86 a70b35deb2b5
>  13018 pass irrelevant
>  13032 fail a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00 
> 50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff 
> 6d8b472233779c2a028a03843603030d2b1aee86 a70b35deb2b5
>  13046 []
>  13037 []
>  13053 fail irrelevant
>  13061 fail irrelevant
>  13069 fail irrelevant
>  13099 fail a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00 
> 50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff 
> f7f8c33cd49885d69efc2e5f7f9a613d631762e2 5b6a857411ba
>  13102 fail a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00 
> 50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff 
> 6d8b472233779c2a028a03843603030d2b1aee86 9d1fd58ff602
>  13103 pass a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00 
> 50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff 
> 6d8b472233779c2a028a03843603030d2b1aee86 32034d1914a6
>  13075 fail irrelevant
>  13105 fail a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00 
> 50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff 
> 6d8b472233779c2a028a03843603030d2b1aee86 9d1fd58ff602
>  13080 fail irrelevant
>  13087 pass a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00 
> 50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff 
> 6d8b472233779c2a028a03843603030d2b1aee86 32034d1914a6
>  13092 fail irrelevant
>  13093 fail a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00 
> 50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff 
> 6d8b472233779c2a028a03843603030d2b1aee86 5b61b5779fca
>  13094 fail a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00 
> 50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff 
> 6d8b472233779c2a028a03843603030d2b1aee86 4d40d7a4c6f1
>  13095 fail a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00 
> 50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff 
> 6d8b472233779c2a028a03843603030d2b1aee86 9d1fd58ff602
>  13088 fail a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00 
> 50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff 
> f7f8c33cd49885d69efc2e5f7f9a613d631762e2 5b6a857411ba
>  13096 pass a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00 
> 50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff 
> 6d8b472233779c2a028a03843603030d2b1aee86 32034d1914a6
> Searching for interesting versions
>  Result found: flight 13024 (pass), for basis pass
>  Result found: flight 13088 (fail), for basis failure
>  Repro found: flight 13096 (pass), for basis pass
>  Repro found: flight 13099 (fail), for basis failure
>  0 revisions at a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00 
> 50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff 
> 6d8b472233779c2a028a03843603030d2b1aee86 32034d1914a6
> No revisions left to test, checking graph state.
>  Result found: flight 13024 (pass), for last pass
>  Result found: flight 13095 (fail), for first failure
>  Repro found: flight 13096 (pass), for last pass
>  Repro found: flight 13102 (fail), for first failure
>  Repro found: flight 13103 (pass), for last pass
>  Repro found: flight 13105 (fail), for first failure
> 
> *** Found and reproduced problem changeset ***
> 
>   Bug is in tree:  xen http://xenbits.xen.org/staging/xen-unstable.hg 
>   Bug introduced:  9d1fd58ff602
>   Bug not present: 32034d1914a6
> 
> pulling from ssh://xen@xenbits.xen.org/HG/staging/xen-unstable.hg
> searching for changes
> no changes found
> 
>   changeset:   25468:9d1fd58ff602
>   user:        Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com>
>   date:        Fri Jun 08 15:26:01 2012 +0100
>       
>       xl: check for meaningful combination of sedf config file parameters
>       
>       As it happens in the implementation of `xl sched-sedf -d
...'', some
>       consistency checking is needed for the scheduling parameters when
>       they come from the config file.
>       
>       Signed-off-by: Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com>
>       Acked-by: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>
>       Acked-by: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com>
>       Committed-by: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>
>       
>       
> 
> Revision graph left in 
>
/home/xc_osstest/results/bisect.xen-unstable.test-amd64-amd64-xl-win7-amd64.w
> indows-install.{dot,ps,png,html}.
> ----------------------------------------
> 13105: tolerable ALL FAIL
> 
> flight 13105 xen-unstable real-bisect [real]
> http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~xensrcts/logs/13105/ 
> 
> Failures :-/ but no regressions.
> 
> Tests which did not succeed,
> including tests which could not be run:
>  test-amd64-amd64-xl-win7-amd64  7 windows-install       fail baseline
untested
> 
> 
> jobs:
>  test-amd64-amd64-xl-win7-amd64                               fail    
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> sg-report-flight on woking.cam.xci-test.com
> logs: /home/xc_osstest/logs
> images: /home/xc_osstest/images
> 
> Logs, config files, etc. are available at
>     http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~xensrcts/logs 
> 
> Test harness code can be found at
>     http://xenbits.xensource.com/gitweb?p=osstest.git;a=summary 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@lists.xen.org 
> http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

Ian Campbell

2012-Jun-20 09:06 UTC

head link

Re: [xen-unstable bisection] complete test-amd64-amd64-xl-win7-amd64

On Wed, 2012-06-20 at 08:51 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:> >>> On 20.06.12 at 04:40, xen.org
<ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
> > branch xen-unstable
> > xen branch xen-unstable
> > job test-amd64-amd64-xl-win7-amd64
> > test windows-install
> >
> > Tree: linux git://xenbits.xen.org/linux-pvops.git
> > Tree: qemu git://xenbits.xen.org/staging/qemu-xen-unstable.git
> > Tree: qemuu git://xenbits.xen.org/staging/qemu-upstream-unstable.git
> > Tree: xen http://xenbits.xen.org/staging/xen-unstable.hg
> >
> > *** Found and reproduced problem changeset ***
> >
> >   Bug is in tree:  xen http://xenbits.xen.org/staging/xen-unstable.hg
> >   Bug introduced:  9d1fd58ff602
> >   Bug not present: 32034d1914a6
> >
> >
> >   changeset:   25468:9d1fd58ff602
> >   user:        Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com>
> >   date:        Fri Jun 08 15:26:01 2012 +0100
> >
> >       xl: check for meaningful combination of sedf config file
parameters
> 
> Dario,
> 
> these bisection results have been posted for a couple of days,
> yet so far I don''t recall having seen any sign from you as to what
> you''re plans are. Given that this has now been holding up a push
> for over 10 days, I think I''ll have to request reverting the
change
> otherwise.
It''s not been as long as ten days, the commit was the 14th. But yes we
need to know what is going on here ASAP -- Dario please can you take a
look.

It''s an odd one -- the logs seem to show the guest has started but the
patch in question would (or should!) cause an early error return during
build. It''s possible that the recent test system outage has caused the
bisector to get confused but it has fingered this changeset at least
twice now.

The bisector really should try and pull out S-o-b''s et al from the
offending commit and add appropriate CCs. There''s also something of an
expectation that developers will keep an eye on the test system results
after a patch of theirs has been expected though.

Ian.
> 
> Jan
> 
> >       As it happens in the implementation of `xl sched-sedf -d
...'', some
> >       consistency checking is needed for the scheduling parameters
when
> >       they come from the config file.
> >
> >       Signed-off-by: Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com>
> >       Acked-by: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>
> >       Acked-by: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com>
> >       Committed-by: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > For bisection revision-tuple graph see:
> >
> >
http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~xensrcts/results/bisect.xen-unstable.test-
> > amd64-amd64-xl-win7-amd64.windows-install.html
> > Revision IDs in each graph node refer, respectively, to the Trees
above.
> >
> > ----------------------------------------
> > Searching for failure / basis pass:
> >  13088 fail [host=leaf-beetle] / 13025 ok.
> > Failure / basis pass flights: 13088 / 13025
> > Tree: linux git://xenbits.xen.org/linux-pvops.git
> > Tree: qemu git://xenbits.xen.org/staging/qemu-xen-unstable.git
> > Tree: qemuu git://xenbits.xen.org/staging/qemu-upstream-unstable.git
> > Tree: xen http://xenbits.xen.org/staging/xen-unstable.hg
> > Latest a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00
> > 50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff
> > f7f8c33cd49885d69efc2e5f7f9a613d631762e2 5b6a857411ba
> > Basis pass a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00
> > 50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff
> > 6d8b472233779c2a028a03843603030d2b1aee86 32034d1914a6
> > Generating revisions with ./adhoc-revtuple-generator
> >
git://xenbits.xen.org/linux-pvops.git#a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00-
> > a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00
> >
git://xenbits.xen.org/staging/qemu-xen-unstable.git#50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0
> > aae98709ca9ffff-50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff
> >
git://xenbits.xen.org/staging/qemu-upstream-unstable.git#6d8b472233779c2a028a03
> > 843603030d2b1aee86-f7f8c33cd49885d69efc2e5f7f9a613d631762e2
> >
http://xenbits.xen.org/staging/xen-unstable.hg#32034d1914a6-5b6a857411ba
> > using cache /export/home/osstest/repos/git-cache...
> > using cache /export/home/osstest/repos/git-cache...
> > locked cache /export/home/osstest/repos/git-cache...
> > processing ./cacheing-git clone --bare
> > git://xenbits.xen.org/staging/qemu-upstream-unstable.git
> > /export/home/osstest/repos/qemu-upstream-unstable...
> > Initialized empty Git repository in
> > /export/home/osstest/repos/qemu-upstream-unstable/
> > updating cache /export/home/osstest/repos/git-cache
qemu-upstream-unstable...
> > pulling from ssh://xen@xenbits.xen.org/HG/staging/xen-unstable.hg
> > searching for changes
> > no changes found
> > using cache /export/home/osstest/repos/git-cache...
> > using cache /export/home/osstest/repos/git-cache...
> > locked cache /export/home/osstest/repos/git-cache...
> > processing ./cacheing-git clone --bare
> > git://xenbits.xen.org/staging/qemu-upstream-unstable.git
> > /export/home/osstest/repos/qemu-upstream-unstable...
> > Initialized empty Git repository in
> > /export/home/osstest/repos/qemu-upstream-unstable/
> > updating cache /export/home/osstest/repos/git-cache
qemu-upstream-unstable...
> > pulling from ssh://xen@xenbits.xen.org/HG/staging/xen-unstable.hg
> > searching for changes
> > no changes found
> > Loaded 1021 nodes in revision graph
> > Searching for test results:
> >  13019 pass irrelevant
> >  12958 pass irrelevant
> >  13004 pass irrelevant
> >  13027 fail a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00
> > 50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff
> > 6d8b472233779c2a028a03843603030d2b1aee86 a70b35deb2b5
> >  12981 pass irrelevant
> >  12960 pass irrelevant
> >  12964 pass irrelevant
> >  13038 []
> >  12967 pass irrelevant
> >  12968 pass irrelevant
> >  12969 pass irrelevant
> >  12971 pass irrelevant
> >  12972 pass irrelevant
> >  12975 pass irrelevant
> >  12976 pass irrelevant
> >  12977 pass irrelevant
> >  12988 pass irrelevant
> >  12978 pass irrelevant
> >  13020 pass irrelevant
> >  12979 pass irrelevant
> >  12995 pass irrelevant
> >  12980 pass irrelevant
> >  12996 pass irrelevant
> >  13006 pass irrelevant
> >  12997 pass irrelevant
> >  12998 pass irrelevant
> >  13023 pass irrelevant
> >  13012 pass irrelevant
> >  13051 fail irrelevant
> >  12999 pass irrelevant
> >  13013 pass irrelevant
> >  13002 pass irrelevant
> >  13024 pass a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00
> > 50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff
> > 6d8b472233779c2a028a03843603030d2b1aee86 32034d1914a6
> >  13003 pass irrelevant
> >  13014 pass irrelevant
> >  13045 []
> >  13015 pass irrelevant
> >  13025 pass a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00
> > 50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff
> > 6d8b472233779c2a028a03843603030d2b1aee86 32034d1914a6
> >  13016 pass irrelevant
> >  13026 fail a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00
> > 50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff
> > 6d8b472233779c2a028a03843603030d2b1aee86 a70b35deb2b5
> >  13018 pass irrelevant
> >  13032 fail a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00
> > 50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff
> > 6d8b472233779c2a028a03843603030d2b1aee86 a70b35deb2b5
> >  13046 []
> >  13037 []
> >  13053 fail irrelevant
> >  13061 fail irrelevant
> >  13069 fail irrelevant
> >  13099 fail a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00
> > 50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff
> > f7f8c33cd49885d69efc2e5f7f9a613d631762e2 5b6a857411ba
> >  13102 fail a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00
> > 50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff
> > 6d8b472233779c2a028a03843603030d2b1aee86 9d1fd58ff602
> >  13103 pass a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00
> > 50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff
> > 6d8b472233779c2a028a03843603030d2b1aee86 32034d1914a6
> >  13075 fail irrelevant
> >  13105 fail a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00
> > 50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff
> > 6d8b472233779c2a028a03843603030d2b1aee86 9d1fd58ff602
> >  13080 fail irrelevant
> >  13087 pass a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00
> > 50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff
> > 6d8b472233779c2a028a03843603030d2b1aee86 32034d1914a6
> >  13092 fail irrelevant
> >  13093 fail a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00
> > 50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff
> > 6d8b472233779c2a028a03843603030d2b1aee86 5b61b5779fca
> >  13094 fail a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00
> > 50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff
> > 6d8b472233779c2a028a03843603030d2b1aee86 4d40d7a4c6f1
> >  13095 fail a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00
> > 50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff
> > 6d8b472233779c2a028a03843603030d2b1aee86 9d1fd58ff602
> >  13088 fail a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00
> > 50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff
> > f7f8c33cd49885d69efc2e5f7f9a613d631762e2 5b6a857411ba
> >  13096 pass a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00
> > 50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff
> > 6d8b472233779c2a028a03843603030d2b1aee86 32034d1914a6
> > Searching for interesting versions
> >  Result found: flight 13024 (pass), for basis pass
> >  Result found: flight 13088 (fail), for basis failure
> >  Repro found: flight 13096 (pass), for basis pass
> >  Repro found: flight 13099 (fail), for basis failure
> >  0 revisions at a938a246d34912423c560f475ccf1ce0c71d9d00
> > 50c553be472c9f4b05a0526c0aae98709ca9ffff
> > 6d8b472233779c2a028a03843603030d2b1aee86 32034d1914a6
> > No revisions left to test, checking graph state.
> >  Result found: flight 13024 (pass), for last pass
> >  Result found: flight 13095 (fail), for first failure
> >  Repro found: flight 13096 (pass), for last pass
> >  Repro found: flight 13102 (fail), for first failure
> >  Repro found: flight 13103 (pass), for last pass
> >  Repro found: flight 13105 (fail), for first failure
> >
> > *** Found and reproduced problem changeset ***
> >
> >   Bug is in tree:  xen http://xenbits.xen.org/staging/xen-unstable.hg
> >   Bug introduced:  9d1fd58ff602
> >   Bug not present: 32034d1914a6
> >
> > pulling from ssh://xen@xenbits.xen.org/HG/staging/xen-unstable.hg
> > searching for changes
> > no changes found
> >
> >   changeset:   25468:9d1fd58ff602
> >   user:        Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com>
> >   date:        Fri Jun 08 15:26:01 2012 +0100
> >
> >       xl: check for meaningful combination of sedf config file
parameters
> >
> >       As it happens in the implementation of `xl sched-sedf -d
...'', some
> >       consistency checking is needed for the scheduling parameters
when
> >       they come from the config file.
> >
> >       Signed-off-by: Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com>
> >       Acked-by: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>
> >       Acked-by: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com>
> >       Committed-by: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>
> >
> >
> >
> > Revision graph left in
> >
/home/xc_osstest/results/bisect.xen-unstable.test-amd64-amd64-xl-win7-amd64.w
> > indows-install.{dot,ps,png,html}.
> > ----------------------------------------
> > 13105: tolerable ALL FAIL
> >
> > flight 13105 xen-unstable real-bisect [real]
> > http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~xensrcts/logs/13105/
> >
> > Failures :-/ but no regressions.
> >
> > Tests which did not succeed,
> > including tests which could not be run:
> >  test-amd64-amd64-xl-win7-amd64  7 windows-install       fail baseline
untested
> >
> >
> > jobs:
> >  test-amd64-amd64-xl-win7-amd64                               fail
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > sg-report-flight on woking.cam.xci-test.com
> > logs: /home/xc_osstest/logs
> > images: /home/xc_osstest/images
> >
> > Logs, config files, etc. are available at
> >     http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~xensrcts/logs
> >
> > Test harness code can be found at
> >     http://xenbits.xensource.com/gitweb?p=osstest.git;a=summary
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Xen-devel mailing list
> > Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
> > http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
> http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

Dario Faggioli

2012-Jun-20 10:34 UTC

head link

Re: [xen-unstable bisection] complete test-amd64-amd64-xl-win7-amd64

On Wed, 2012-06-20 at 10:06 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:> On Wed, 2012-06-20 at 08:51 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > >>> On 20.06.12 at 04:40, xen.org
<ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
> > > branch xen-unstable
> > > xen branch xen-unstable
> > > job test-amd64-amd64-xl-win7-amd64
> > > test windows-install
> > >
> > > Tree: linux git://xenbits.xen.org/linux-pvops.git
> > > Tree: qemu git://xenbits.xen.org/staging/qemu-xen-unstable.git
> > > Tree: qemuu
git://xenbits.xen.org/staging/qemu-upstream-unstable.git
> > > Tree: xen http://xenbits.xen.org/staging/xen-unstable.hg
> > >
> > > *** Found and reproduced problem changeset ***
> > >
> > >   Bug is in tree:  xen
http://xenbits.xen.org/staging/xen-unstable.hg
> > >   Bug introduced:  9d1fd58ff602
> > >   Bug not present: 32034d1914a6
> > >
> > >
> > >   changeset:   25468:9d1fd58ff602
> > >   user:        Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com>
> > >   date:        Fri Jun 08 15:26:01 2012 +0100
> > >
> > >       xl: check for meaningful combination of sedf config file
parameters
> > 
> > Dario,
> > 
> > these bisection results have been posted for a couple of days,
> > yet so far I don''t recall having seen any sign from you as to
what
> > you''re plans are. Given that this has now been holding up a
push
> > for over 10 days, I think I''ll have to request reverting the
change
> > otherwise.
> 
> It''s not been as long as ten days, the commit was the 14th. But
yes we
> need to know what is going on here ASAP -- Dario please can you take a
> look.
> Definitely!

Sorry for this, the mail has been put on hold in some folder and I
haven''t even seen it till now! :-(
> It''s an odd one -- the logs seem to show the guest has started but
the
> patch in question would (or should!) cause an early error return during
> build. It''s possible that the recent test system outage has caused
the
> bisector to get confused but it has fingered this changeset at least
> twice now.
> I''ll check what''s going on immediately. Sorry again.
> The bisector really should try and pull out S-o-b''s et al from the
> offending commit and add appropriate CCs. There''s also something
of an
> expectation that developers will keep an eye on the test system results
> after a patch of theirs has been expected though.
> Sure. Being on Cc would have helped a bit, but it''s definitely my fault
not noticing the whole thing sooner!

Thanks and Regards,
Dario

-- 
<<This happens because I choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Dario Faggioli, Ph.D, http://retis.sssup.it/people/faggioli
Senior Software Engineer, Citrix Systems R&D Ltd., Cambridge (UK)



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

Ian Jackson

2012-Jun-20 13:43 UTC

head link

Re: [xen-unstable bisection] complete test-amd64-amd64-xl-win7-amd64

Ian Campbell writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-unstable bisection] complete
test-amd64-amd64-xl-win7-amd64"):> It''s an odd one -- the logs seem to show the guest has started but
the
> patch in question would (or should!) cause an early error return during
> build. It''s possible that the recent test system outage has caused
the
> bisector to get confused but it has fingered this changeset at least
> twice now.
The bisector has repro''d this on the same host with 6 tests:
alternately failures for 9d1fd58ff602 and successes for 32034d1914a6.

So if it''s a heisenbug we''ve been moderately (but not
outrageously)
unlucky that it actually fingered a specific changeset rather than
just shrugging its shoulders and moving on.  (It does the latter quite
a lot.)
> The bisector really should try and pull out S-o-b''s et al from the
> offending commit and add appropriate CCs. There''s also something
of an
> expectation that developers will keep an eye on the test system results
> after a patch of theirs has been expected though.
Yes, it would be nice if it did that.

Ian.

Dario Faggioli

2012-Jun-20 14:01 UTC

head link

Re: [xen-unstable bisection] complete test-amd64-amd64-xl-win7-amd64

On Wed, 2012-06-20 at 14:43 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:> Ian Campbell writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-unstable bisection]
complete test-amd64-amd64-xl-win7-amd64"):
> > It''s an odd one -- the logs seem to show the guest has
started but the
> > patch in question would (or should!) cause an early error return
during
> > build. It''s possible that the recent test system outage has
caused the
> > bisector to get confused but it has fingered this changeset at least
> > twice now.
> 
> The bisector has repro''d this on the same host with 6 tests:
> alternately failures for 9d1fd58ff602 and successes for 32034d1914a6.
> Which means it might be unrelated from that specific commit (sorry if
it''s a stupid question, just want to be sure I''m getting
things
correct :-/ )
> So if it''s a heisenbug we''ve been moderately (but not
outrageously)
> unlucky that it actually fingered a specific changeset rather than
> just shrugging its shoulders and moving on.  (It does the latter quite
> a lot.)
> Just to be sure, this part of the bisector report:

branch xen-unstable
xen branch xen-unstable
job test-amd64-amd64-xl-win7-amd64
test windows-install

means that the test that failed was ''job
test-amd64-amd64-xl-win7-amd64'' (and, specifically, during
''windows-install'' phase), right?

I''m asking because I actually found a bug in that change, _but_ it only
comes into play if the SEDF scheduler is being used. In fact, this test
also fails:

http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~xensrcts/logs/13053/test-amd64-amd64-xl-sedf/info.html

and it does by saying this:

2012-06-16 07:37:47 Z executing ssh ... root@10.80.248.105 xl create
/etc/xen/debian.guest.osstest.cfg
libxl: error: libxl.c:3619:sched_sedf_domain_set: setting domain sched sedf:
Invalid argument
libxl: error: libxl_create.c:710:domcreate_bootloader_done: cannot (re-)build
domain: -3
Parsing config from /etc/xen/debian.guest.osstest.cfg

Which is actually related to my patch, and for which I already have a
fix ready.

OTOH, I really don''t see how that patch might cause that HVM windows
domain to die, given the log for ''test-amd64-amd64-xl-sedf''
says this:

Parsing config from /etc/xen/win.guest.osstest.cfg
Daemon running with PID 2642

Which seems to mean, at least to me, that the check happened without
causing any issues (as it, conversely, does when SEDF is the scheduler).

Anyway, I''ll send the patch for the SEDF case and try to reproduce the
bug for the credit+Win7+HVM case.

Thanks and Regards,
Dario

-- 
<<This happens because I choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Dario Faggioli, Ph.D, http://retis.sssup.it/people/faggioli
Senior Software Engineer, Citrix Systems R&D Ltd., Cambridge (UK)

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

Ian Jackson

2012-Jun-20 15:32 UTC

head link

Re: [xen-unstable bisection] complete test-amd64-amd64-xl-win7-amd64

Dario Faggioli writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-unstable bisection] complete
test-amd64-amd64-xl-win7-amd64"):> On Wed, 2012-06-20 at 14:43 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > The bisector has repro''d this on the same host with 6 tests:
> > alternately failures for 9d1fd58ff602 and successes for 32034d1914a6.
> 
> Which means it might be unrelated from that specific commit (sorry if
> it''s a stupid question, just want to be sure I''m getting
things
> correct :-/ )
No.  If it fails with 9d1fd58ff602 and succeeds with 32034d1914a6 then
9d1fd58ff602 is responsible because 32034d1914a6 is the only parent of
9d1fd58ff602.
> > So if it''s a heisenbug we''ve been moderately (but
not outrageously)
> > unlucky that it actually fingered a specific changeset rather than
> > just shrugging its shoulders and moving on.  (It does the latter quite
> > a lot.)
> 
> Just to be sure, this part of the bisector report:
> 
> branch xen-unstable
> xen branch xen-unstable
> job test-amd64-amd64-xl-win7-amd64
> test windows-install
> 
> means that the test that failed was ''job
> test-amd64-amd64-xl-win7-amd64'' (and, specifically, during
> ''windows-install'' phase), right?
Yes.
> I''m asking because I actually found a bug in that change, _but_ it
only
> comes into play if the SEDF scheduler is being used. In fact, this test
> also fails:
> 
>
http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~xensrcts/logs/13053/test-amd64-amd64-xl-sedf/info.html
...> 2012-06-16 07:37:47 Z executing ssh ... root@10.80.248.105 xl create
/etc/xen/debian.guest.osstest.cfg
> libxl: error: libxl.c:3619:sched_sedf_domain_set: setting domain sched
sedf: Invalid argument
> libxl: error: libxl_create.c:710:domcreate_bootloader_done: cannot
(re-)build domain: -3
> Parsing config from /etc/xen/debian.guest.osstest.cfg
> 
> Which is actually related to my patch, and for which I already have a
> fix ready.
Right.
> OTOH, I really don''t see how that patch might cause that HVM
windows
> domain to die, given the log for
''test-amd64-amd64-xl-sedf'' says this:
> 
> Parsing config from /etc/xen/win.guest.osstest.cfg
> Daemon running with PID 2642
> 
> Which seems to mean, at least to me, that the check happened without
> causing any issues (as it, conversely, does when SEDF is the scheduler).
The failure of the non-sedf test is that Windows takes too long to
become ready.

If you look at this page:

 
http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~xensrcts/results/bisect.xen-unstable.test-amd64-amd64-xl-win7-amd64.windows-install.html

you can see what the bisector did.

Flights 13024, 13025, 13087, 13096 and 13103 used code built from 
32034d1914a6 and passed.

Flights 13095, 13102 and 13105 used code built from from 9d1fd58ff602
and failed.  These all used the builds from flight 13033, which was
another bisector run.

It is possible that the build in 13033 is broken somehow.
Xen and tools came from here:
  http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~xensrcts/logs/13033/build-amd64/
Dom0 kernel came from here:
  http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~xensrcts/logs/13033/build-amd64-pvops/

Ian.

Dario Faggioli

2012-Jun-20 17:12 UTC

head link

Re: [xen-unstable bisection] complete test-amd64-amd64-xl-win7-amd64

On Wed, 2012-06-20 at 16:32 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:> > Which means it might be unrelated from that specific commit (sorry if
> > it''s a stupid question, just want to be sure I''m
getting things
> > correct :-/ )
> 
> No.  If it fails with 9d1fd58ff602 and succeeds with 32034d1914a6 then
> 9d1fd58ff602 is responsible because 32034d1914a6 is the only parent of
> 9d1fd58ff602.
> I see.
> Flights 13095, 13102 and 13105 used code built from from 9d1fd58ff602
> and failed.  These all used the builds from flight 13033, which was
> another bisector run.
> 
> It is possible that the build in 13033 is broken somehow.
>Well, I couldn''t say how that change could affect a non-sedf run
otherwise! :-(

Let''s see what future flights will tell us...

Thanks and Regards,
Dario

-- 
<<This happens because I choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Dario Faggioli, Ph.D, http://retis.sssup.it/people/faggioli
Senior Software Engineer, Citrix Systems R&D Ltd., Cambridge (UK)



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

Dario Faggioli

2012-Jun-20 17:18 UTC

head link

Re: [xen-unstable bisection] complete test-amd64-amd64-xl-win7-amd64

On Wed, 2012-06-20 at 08:51 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:> >>> On 20.06.12 at 04:40, xen.org
<ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
> > branch xen-unstable
> > xen branch xen-unstable
> > job test-amd64-amd64-xl-win7-amd64
> > test windows-install
> > 
> > Tree: linux git://xenbits.xen.org/linux-pvops.git
> > Tree: qemu git://xenbits.xen.org/staging/qemu-xen-unstable.git
> > Tree: qemuu git://xenbits.xen.org/staging/qemu-upstream-unstable.git
> > Tree: xen http://xenbits.xen.org/staging/xen-unstable.hg 
> > 
> > *** Found and reproduced problem changeset ***
> > 
> >   Bug is in tree:  xen http://xenbits.xen.org/staging/xen-unstable.hg 
> >   Bug introduced:  9d1fd58ff602
> >   Bug not present: 32034d1914a6
> > 
> > 
> >   changeset:   25468:9d1fd58ff602
> >   user:        Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com>
> >   date:        Fri Jun 08 15:26:01 2012 +0100
> >       
> >       xl: check for meaningful combination of sedf config file
parameters
> Ok, this was causing a bug at least in *-sedf-* related tes runs, for
which I just sent a fix (<cbd6b5a7d0451a98a8c6.1340212196@Solace>,
[PATCH] xl: fix sedf parameters checking).

Basically, when not specifying explicitly the sedf scheduling
parameters, one couldn''t even start a new domain.

I''d swear I tested that case, even more than once, but I apparently am
wrong. :-(

Anyway, sorry for both that and not noticing this sooner. As soon as
we''ll have the fix committed (provided you like it) we can see what
happens to both the -sedf and non -sedf runs in future flights. I know
the bisector is something to be trusted, but I really hope to see the
issue for non -sedf cases to be caused by something else, as I can''t
reproduce it and neither I can see how that could happen. :-O

Thanks and Regards,
Dario

-- 
<<This happens because I choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Dario Faggioli, Ph.D, http://retis.sssup.it/people/faggioli
Senior Software Engineer, Citrix Systems R&D Ltd., Cambridge (UK)



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

Xen devel - Jun 2012 - [xen-unstable bisection] complete test-amd64-amd64-xl-win7-amd64

[xen-unstable bisection] complete test-amd64-amd64-xl-win7-amd64

Re: [xen-unstable bisection] complete test-amd64-amd64-xl-win7-amd64

Re: [xen-unstable bisection] complete test-amd64-amd64-xl-win7-amd64

Re: [xen-unstable bisection] complete test-amd64-amd64-xl-win7-amd64

Re: [xen-unstable bisection] complete test-amd64-amd64-xl-win7-amd64

Re: [xen-unstable bisection] complete test-amd64-amd64-xl-win7-amd64

Re: [xen-unstable bisection] complete test-amd64-amd64-xl-win7-amd64

Re: [xen-unstable bisection] complete test-amd64-amd64-xl-win7-amd64

Re: [xen-unstable bisection] complete test-amd64-amd64-xl-win7-amd64