Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-unstable bisection] complete test-amd64-i386-rhel6hvm-intel

[Laszlo Ersek <lersek@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 09/01/11 18:26, Ian Jackson wrote:

> > job test-amd64-i386-rhel6hvm-intel
> >    changeset:   23802:bb9b81008733
> >    user:        Laszlo Ersek<lersek@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >    date:        Wed Aug 31 15:16:14 2011 +0100
> >
> >        x86: Increase the default NR_CPUS to 256
> >
> >        Changeset 21012:ef845a385014 bumped the default to 128 about one and a
> >        half years ago. Increase it now to 256, as systems with eg. 160
> >        logical CPUs are becoming (have become) common.
> >
> >        Signed-off-by: Laszlo Ersek<lersek@xxxxxxxxxx>
> My bisector is pretty reliable nowadays.  Looking at the revision
> graph it tested before/after/before/after/before/after, ie three times
> each on the same host.
>
> This change looks innocuous enough TBH.  Is there any way this change
> could have broken a PV-on-HVM guest ?  Note that RHEL6, which is what
> this is testing, seems to generally be full of bugs.
>
> If the problem is indeed a bug in the current RHEL6 then I will add
> this test to the "do not care" list.
In what way was the guest broken? How many physical cores/threads was 
the hypervisor running on?
Thanks,
lacos

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel