Re: [Xen-devel] [qemu-mainline test] 65237: regressions - FAIL

[Anthony PERARD <anthony.perard@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 10:19:23AM +0000, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Mon, 2015-11-30 at 18:47 +0000, Anthony PERARD wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 09:40:28AM +0000, osstest service owner wrote:
> > > flight 65237 qemu-mainline real [real]
> > > http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/65237/
> > > 
> > > Regressions :-(
> > > 
> > > Tests which did not succeed and are blocking,
> > > including tests which could not be run:
> > >  test-amd64-i386-xl-qemuu-ovmf-amd64  9 debian-hvm-install fail REGR. vs. 
> > > 64579
> > >  test-amd64-i386-xl-qemuu-debianhvm-amd64 9 debian-hvm-install fail REGR. 
> > > vs. 64579
> > 
> > In this test, qemu SIGABRT with "Bad ram offset efffd000" as an error
> > message. The test started to fail when osstest started to test with a guest
> > with 5000 of memory instead of 768.
> 
> That's still a QEMU and/or Xen bug though, right?
> 
> IOW you aren't trying to suggest this is an osstest bug, I think.

No, I'm not. I was merely pointing out that the issue appear with guest
with lots of memory.

> NB the size of the guest ram depends on the amount of host RAM available,
> so this will vary across hosts.
> 
> The apparent switch to 5000 for test-amd64-i386-xl-qemuu-ovmf-amd64 was
> from merlot1 starting in flight 65078, but there was a pass on merlot1
> at 63741. My guess is that a change in one of the other trees between those
> two has exposed the issue.

Thanks for this pointer. I've started a bisect with qemuu from this flight,
since it's quick to reproduce the issue. And the first commit to exhibit
the issue is: 4ed023ce2a39ab5812d33cf4d819def168965a7f (Round up RAMBlock
sizes to host page sizes).

I'll report that upstream.

-- 
Anthony PERARD

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