Re: [Xen-devel] (updated) test report for xen-unstable tree with upstream QEMU

[Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 2012-12-24 at 02:24 +0000, Ren, Yongjie wrote:
> Hi All,
> We did some testing for Xen-unstable tree with upstream QEMU.

Thanks.

Out of interest do you also test (or plan to test) the qemu-upstream
stable branch which is built by default when you build Xen?

> We covered basic guest booting up, power management, VT-d, SR-IOV features.
> We found 4 new bugs which only exist in upstream QEMU not in qemu-xen.
> 
> We followed the below wiki page to use upstream QEMU.
> http://wiki.xen.org/wiki/QEMU_Upstream
> 
> test tree:
> xen-unstable-tree.hg: C/S 26193 (about 20 days ago)
> qemu.git: commit e9bff10f8db (about 20 days ago)
> Dom0: Linux 3.6.9 release version.
> 
> test machine:
> Intel Westmere-EP and SandyBridge-EP systems.
> 
> new bugs (which don't exist with qemu-xen-unstable tree):
> 1. 'maxvcpus=NUM' item is not supported in upstream QEMU
>   http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1837
>   -- This blocked vCPU hot-plug for HVM guest.
> 2. Guest console hangs after save/restore or live-migration when setting 
> 'hpet=0' in guest config file
>   http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1838
> 3. 'xen_platform_pci=0' setting cannot make the guest use emulated PCI 
> devices by default
>   http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1839
> 4. Guest free memory with upstream qemu is 14MB lower than that with 
> qemu-xen-unstable.git
>   http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1836
>   -- This might not be a bug; we just curious to know what the additional 
> 14MB memory is for.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel



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