Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-4.6-testing bisection] complete test-amd64-amd64-xl-pvh-intel

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 06.08.16 at 18:55, <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 06/08/16 17:24, osstest service owner wrote:
>> branch xen-4.6-testing
>> xenbranch xen-4.6-testing
>> job test-amd64-amd64-xl-pvh-intel
>> testid xen-boot
>>
>> Tree: linux git://xenbits.xen.org/linux-pvops.git
>> Tree: linuxfirmware git://xenbits.xen.org/osstest/linux-firmware.git
>> Tree: qemu git://xenbits.xen.org/qemu-xen-traditional.git
>> Tree: qemuu git://xenbits.xen.org/qemu-xen.git
>> Tree: xen git://xenbits.xen.org/xen.git
>>
>> *** Found and reproduced problem changeset ***
>>
>>   Bug is in tree:  xen git://xenbits.xen.org/xen.git
>>   Bug introduced:  477080fc560a3025d451175b69995e62a2ce1a8d
>>   Bug not present: ec712ba0838b7d7fb11229d1a5ab42978c14a782
>>   Last fail repro: http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/99995/ 
>>
>>
>>   commit 477080fc560a3025d451175b69995e62a2ce1a8d
>>   Author: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>   Date:   Fri Aug 5 13:47:04 2016 +0200
>>   
>>       xen: Have schedulers revise initial placement
> 
> More fallout from backports.  Perhaps it would be safer not to backport
> this change.

As (mostly) expected (see the mail I had sent to George and
Dario); I'll revert it on 4.6 too, but I think ultimately (once its
prereqs have been identified) we want this backported.

Jan


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