Re: Xen 4.10 breakage with buster (was Re: [xen-4.10-testing test] 151033: regressions - trouble: blocked/fail/pass/starved)

[Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 12/06/2020 17:47, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Ian Jackson writes ("Xen 4.10 breakage with buster (was Re: [xen-4.10-testing 
> test] 151033: regressions - trouble: blocked/fail/pass/starved)"):
>>>  test-amd64-amd64-xl-qcow2    10 debian-di-install        fail REGR. vs. 
>>> 150039
>>>  test-amd64-amd64-pygrub      10 debian-di-install        fail REGR. vs. 
>>> 150039
>>>  test-amd64-i386-xl-raw       10 debian-di-install        fail REGR. vs. 
>>> 150039
>>   domainbuilder: detail: xc_dom_find_loader: trying Linux bzImage loader ... 
>>   domainbuilder: detail: XZ: Saw data stream end
>>   domainbuilder: detail: _xc_try_lzma_decode: XZ decompress OK, 0x4cd8f0 -> 
>> 0x1a7779c
>>   domainbuilder: detail: loader probe OK
>>   ...
>>   domainbuilder: detail: xc_dom_alloc_segment:   module0      : 
>> 0xffffffff82c00000 -> 0xffffffff82c02000  (pfn 0x2c00 + 0x2 pages)
>>   xc: error: panic: xc_dom_core.c:387: xc_dom_do_gunzip: inflate failed 
>> (rc=-5): Internal error
>>   libxl: error: libxl_dom.c:744:libxl__build_dom: xc_dom_build_image failed: 
>> No such file or directory
>>
>> http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/151033/test-amd64-amd64-pygrub/10.ts-debian-di-install.log
>>
>> ????  Anyone have any ideas ?  I would have guessed that this was an
>> incompatibility between pygrub and the boot config made by the new
>> pygrub but
>>    git-log origin/staging-4.10..origin/stable-4.11 tools/pygrub/
>> suggests not.
> Andy suggested on IRC that there were some compression fixes which had
> perhaps not been backported far enough.
>
> I think that's
>
>    lz4: fix system halt at boot kernel on x86_64
>    14b62ab3e5a79816edfc6dd3afce1bb68c106ac5
>    master commit: 5d90ff79542ab9c6eebe5c315c68c196bcf353b9
>
>    lz4: refine commit 9143a6c55ef7 for the 64-bit case
>    6561994b87af3e9cd28ee99c42e8b2697621687d
>    master commit: 2d7572cdfa4d481c1ca246aa1ce5239ccae7eb59
>
> Anyone have any objection to me sending those to 4.10 and maybe 4.9 ?
> They apply cleanly in both cases.

Ah - you found them faster than I did.  Yes - these were the ones I was
thinking of.

No objections.

~Andrew