Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC 0 PATCH 3/3] PVH dom0: construct_dom0 changes

[George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 09/10/13 14:13, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 09/10/13 14:02, George Dunlap wrote:
> > On 10/08/2013 01:30 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > > These issues sprang up with your patches,  not with the ones that
> > > Mukesh posted ? Which did get tested for regression and passed with
> > > flying colours? That means there is a working baseline. Would that help?
> > > Mukesh do you have any ideas what might be amiss?
> > The issues with the code motion patch are almost certainly mine.  Andy
> > Cooper ran one of Mukesh's versions through one of the XenRT tests
> > (probably a nightly) and it came up fine.  I just need to go through
> > and figure out what I messed up.
> I ran Mukesh's v10 series through a XenServer BST, which confirmed no
> glaring function regressions in PV and HVM domains.
I'm not sure anyone outside the XenServer team knows what a "BST" might 
entail. :-)  Is that "Basic Smoke Test"?  "Build Sanity Test"?  "Big 
Stress Test"?
 -George

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