Re: [Xen-devel] [qemu-upstream-4.11-testing test] 136184: regressions - FAIL

[Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 4 Jun 2019, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Stefano Stabellini writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [qemu-upstream-4.11-testing test] 
> 136184: regressions - FAIL"):
> > On Tue, 4 Jun 2019, Julien Grall wrote:
> > > Per the discussion before, the .config is different between the 2 flights.
> > > QEMU testing is not selecting CONFIG_LIVEPATCH while staging-4.11 is.
> > 
> > Has anybody tried to start selecting CONFIG_LIVEPATCH in the QEMU testing
> > branch? Is it possible to give it a try?
> 
> I can do this we thinks it's desirable.  But I think it is probably
> actually helpful to test both, just in case non-LIVEPATCH breaks.  As
> it just have.
> 
> AIUI this is thought to be quite a rare problem, so it showing up in a
> qemu branch is OK.
> 
> Otherwise maybe we would have to add both with- and without-LIVEPATCH
> tests to the xen-* flights.  We already have both with- and
> without-XSM, and this would add another dimension to the build matrix.
> And we would have to decide what subset of the tests should be run in
> each configuration.

Hi Ian,

I agree with you it would be desirable to test both LIVEPATCH and
non-LIVEPATCH, and I understand about limitation of resources and test
matrix explosion.

Given the chance, I think it would be better if we had an explicit test
about LIVEPATCH rather than a "hidden" enablement of it within another
different test. Or maybe just call it out explicitly, renaming the test
run to qemu-upstream-livepatch or something like that. In any case, I'll
leave it to you.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel