Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-unstable bisection] complete test-amd64-i386-xl-qemuu-debianhvm-amd64-xsm

[Wei Liu <wei.liu2@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 11:21:24AM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Wei Liu writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-unstable bisection] complete 
> test-amd64-i386-xl-qemuu-debianhvm-amd64-xsm"):
> > On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 10:55:52PM +0000, osstest service owner wrote:
> > > branch xen-unstable
> > > xen branch xen-unstable
> > > job test-amd64-i386-xl-qemuu-debianhvm-amd64-xsm
> > > test debian-hvm-install
> ...
> > >       libxc: split x86 HVM setup_guest into smaller logical functions
> > > 
> > >       This is just a preparatory change to clean up the code in 
> > > setup_guest.
> > >       Should not introduce any functional changes.
> ...
> > > For bisection revision-tuple graph see:
> > >    
> > > http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/results/bisect/xen-unstable/test-amd64-i386-xl-qemuu-debianhvm-amd64-xsm.debian-hvm-install.html
> > > Revision IDs in each graph node refer, respectively, to the Trees above.
> ...
> > The bug has been fixed in staging and we already got a push.
> > 
> > I'm not quite sure why the bisector thought this commit was the culprit,
> 
> When you say "the bug", which bug do you mean ?  I think the bisector
> is fingering this commit because of the types bug introduced in that
> commit and fixed in
>   "[PATCH v2] libxc: fix the types used in xc_dom_image to build HVM guests"
> 

Yes.

> > but I wouldn't spend time on this...
> 
> I need to know if the bisector is producing confusing or wrong output
> :-).
> 

I'm now confident that the bisector is doing the right thing. I dig into
various flights to understand what the long list of flights actually
meant. It might be helpful we have page explaining how to interpret this
email, too.

In a previous reply I said I was confused because the flight that got a
push (63026) had test-amd64-i386-xl-qemuu-debianhvm-amd64-xsm run on
italia*, not merlot*, so I wasn't sure if OSSTest was doing the right
thing.  But then I looked again, the aforementioned test case did get a
pass on merlot* in 63024. So in 63026 OSSTest worked out the tree was
fine.

With that in mind, I'm confident that the bug (misuse of types) is fixed
in staging and master.

Wei.

> Ian.

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