[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-4.3-testing test] 63948: regressions - FAIL
On Wed, 2015-11-11 at 04:35 -0700, Jan Beulich wrote: > > > > On 11.11.15 at 12:25, <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, 2015-11-11 at 03:58 -0700, Jan Beulich wrote: > > > > > > On 10.11.15 at 18:59, <osstest-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > flight 63948 xen-4.3-testing real [real] > > > > http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/63948/ > > > > > > > > Regressions :-( > > > > > > > > Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, > > > > including tests which could not be run: > > > > Âtest-amd64-amd64-migrupgrade 21 guest-migrate/src_host/dst_host > > > > fail > > > > REGR. vs. 63212 > > > > > > This having failed for quite some time, I've finally looked more > > > closely > > > and found > > > > > > Nov 10 14:36:16.949051 (XEN) vmce.c:88: PV restore: unsupported MCA > > > capabilities 0x1000802 for d1:v0 (supported: 0) > > > > > > to be the reason for the EPERM here > > > > > > xc: error: Couldn't set extended vcpu0 info (1 = Operation not > > > permitted): Internal error > > > > > > Taking apart the value, it is MCG_SER_P | MCG_TES_P (the low 8 bits > > > get masked out anyway), which is in line with 4.2's GUEST_MCG_CAP. > > > Hence I would guess that previous successful runs of this test would > > > have been on Intel systems only; I can't see how this test would ever > > > succeed on AMD ones. > > > > FWIW you can find the history of any given test at a URL like: > > http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/results/history/test-amd64- > > amd64 > > -migrupgrade/xen-4.3-testing.html > > > > Figuring out the arch of the machines is a bit of a faff, especially > > since > > some of the relevant logs no longer exist. From > > http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/results/host/huxelrebe0.htm > > l > > http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/results/host/godello0.html > > http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/results/host/pinot0.html > > > > I found recent logs which confirm (via the serial log): > > Huxelrebe: > > ÂÂÂÂCPU0: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E3-1225 v3 @ 3.20GHz stepping 03 > > Godello: > > ÂÂÂÂCPU0: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E3-1220 v3 @ 3.10GHz stepping 03 > > Pinot: > > ÂÂÂÂCPU0: AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 3350 HEÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂstepping 00 > > > > With Huxelrebe passing and godello and pinot failing this doesn't seem > > to > > correlate with your investigation though. > > Looking at that history page you point me to, I see passes on > godello. Uh, yes, two brainfarts on my part, first in mixing up that result, secondly in inverting which one I thought you were saying worked vs didn't. Sorry. > > > > ÂConsidering that 4.3 is out of maintenance, I > > > think the only reasonable change to avoid endless failure here is to > > > limit this test to Intel systems for this version. > > > > Aside from the above I don't think osstest is currently aware of the > > vendor > > of the processors (although I can certainly think of several reasons it > > should be). > > > > But given this is a new test case I would be happy, I think, to > > restrict it > > to only go back as far as the earliest release which was in maintenance > > at > > the time the test was introduced (August this year), or maybe (if > > something > > just dropped out of maintenance recently) just the ones maintained > > today > > (since it took a while for the test case to "bed in" and be made > > working on > > some of the older ones). FWIW the last related fix I see in osstest was > > early October. > > That would be fine too. I'll wait for Ian to have an opinion before doing anything. Ian. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |