[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-devel] [qemu-upstream-unstable test] 12436: regressions - FAIL

Ian Campbell writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [qemu-upstream-unstable test] 12436: 
regressions - FAIL"):
> On Mon, 2012-03-26 at 06:21 +0100, xen.org wrote:
> > flight 12436 qemu-upstream-unstable real [real]
> > http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~xensrcts/logs/12436/
> > 
> > Regressions :-(
> > 
> > Tests which did not succeed and are blocking,
> > including tests which could not be run:
> >  test-amd64-amd64-xl-win       7 windows-install           fail REGR. vs. 
> > 11890
> Is anyone looking into this failure?


This test failure is not related to the single commit made to the
qemu-upstream-unstable tree, since this test doesn't actually even use
qemu-upstream-unstable.  (It's a bug in the test schedule generator
that it even considers this test relevant; it should not run it.)

I have taken a look at the logs.  I think it is a genuine failure
showing up a real bug, but the bug is in xen-unstable or
qemu-xen-unstable or Jeremy's Linux 2.6.32:

The test system decided in flight 12436 that the install had failed
because the guest did not, within the timeout, start listening on the
expected tcp port (which is set up by a guest agent whose installation
and startup is built into the image I'm using).  The guest screenshot,
taken after the timeout via vnc, is a black screen.  The guest
rebooted itself 18 minutes prior to the timeout; it had done a number
of reboots previously (as expected).  The timeout is 7000 seconds

I have searched the database for this test being run on this host
lake-frog (or its twin, fire-frog) with xen-unstable.  The most recent
such run was in an adhoc test I ran (flight 11623) for which the main
logs have expired.  The database (which does not expire) does record
that the whole ts-windows-install step succeeded (on lake-frog) and
took 3660 seconds[1].

This test has also been run on frogs with xen-4.0-testing but AFAICT
it always fails there, in a different manner, regardless of which
host, so this is probably not helpful.

The most recent test run for xen-unstable ran this test successfully
on moss-bug, where it took 6122s.

So it seems likely that the problem is that the HVM Windows
installation on lake-frog takes "too long".  lake-frog is unusual
amongst my test machines; it's much larger.  It's an AMD machine with
32G of RAM, 24 cores over 2 sockets.  Naively it might be expected to
be faster but perhaps the problem is that it's too NUMA.

Regardless, though, I think 6000-odd seconds is indeed too long if
this step previously took 3660 seconds.


[1] This 3660 seconds includes a number of activities which are not
included in the 7000 second timeout, such as the installation of rsync
on the test host, copying of the Windows install ISO image onto the
test host, and so forth.

Xen-devel mailing list



Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.