[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [xen-unstable test] 166960: regressions - FAIL
- To: "osstest-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <osstest-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- From: Dario Faggioli <dfaggioli@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2021 10:44:28 +0000
- Accept-language: en-US
- Arc-authentication-results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=suse.com; dkim=pass header.d=suse.com; arc=none
- Arc-message-signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=36ifU27pnG6qpA2pqL/qjSPu/dqrbRmcJXHUWpIz6Tw=; b=Vrdjofd2NLzPhYKDCljARnpFt+PXM6FDFpkHJSfSzl+wjZ8/P6t7NNxIIZrjdNj//pAfu71jzL/gFw2oV8hdlt44SDy3K4/zSp2AhADNHaMGYybweLZvSERjl3AiVvp1qwcXFo9ir71fKLJ4r71+jsoGrQuFtlR5Jm3TYratKSTtVXSQNiNk08hb0E6Q1Z5B40c1GEhRL+SCLiTKcpBJQYELOVhNNkMgRaLrP5ZakEAXZd9zJ5u3Gaq7KwxURz5SE0FM6+K7IMx3053Fp2Mt4Po1IWHh+0zRFAWmxdLcZlJ46jhLjD6WOowcfrNdqA0FoDA1gbIXhS9ea3B9/bAiqw==
- Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=ZZn4tsaoz9cCaEjfxgPaNx+YvTsu60QP3ZO0AahvDfqtcvSt4km4sZ0lxkzA6K5n8KesRHpY4x9tOPcPYKAlCA6sHI4k2i0hSOupyK1/a/eNe6od0x+9J8V/JZ/DQBAeM9ME/c6qqA5Uiiw11KBCBsiPKlG9Eq0Rhogq6SYQhbVx9t2hbO2ezU6cWiXiXlwER65/JF9QaUZUQz9pOs/WEwDTHTyOWCfQRu2Wg+yFDWM800NxRw4Vq7X1S2HoSFy/UQSu02C5U/XlPlAybDf3b9+gMh/zjLSQG3eEWlvdktLZEU4J1Qejyawyx0DTR0qPUtr2nlpSw8bdUICQ2s6Mrw==
- Authentication-results: dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;dmarc=none action=none header.from=suse.com;
- Delivery-date: Thu, 02 Dec 2021 10:44:49 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
- Thread-index: AQHX52mUfBd5D6xxFU2byl2OP4I40g==
- Thread-topic: [xen-unstable test] 166960: regressions - FAIL
Hey! So, I noticed this osstests report and got curious about one
thing, which looks weird to me... If I am missing something obvious,
sorry for the noise.
On Wed, 2021-12-01 at 05:43 +0000, osstest service owner wrote:
> test-armhf-armhf-xl-multivcpu 18 guest-start/debian.repeat fail REGR.
> vs. 166941
> test-armhf-armhf-xl-credit2 18 guest-start/debian.repeat fail REGR.
> vs. 166941
>
It's about these tests above.
In fact, from, e.g., [1], I see that we have 2 pCPUs:
nr_cpus : 2
...
cpu_topology :
cpu: core socket node
0: 0 0 0
1: 0 0 0
At the same time, in [2] and [3], I see that we're trying to run a
guest with 4 vCPUs. E.g.:
Name ID Mem VCPUs State Time(s)
Domain-0 0 512 2 r----- 468.5
debian.guest.osstest 3 511 4 -b---- 21.1
Isn't it the case that a guest that has more vCPUs than the host has
pCPUs is conceptually wrong and, even if it sometimes works, prone to
(heisen)bugs?
[1]
http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/166964/test-armhf-armhf-xl-credit2/arndale-lakeside-output-xl_info_-n
[2]
http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/166964/test-armhf-armhf-xl-credit2/arndale-lakeside-output-xl_list
[3]
http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/166964/test-armhf-armhf-xl-credit2/arndale-lakeside-output-xl_vcpu-list
--
Dario Faggioli, Ph.D
http://about.me/dario.faggioli
Virtualization Software Engineer
SUSE Labs, SUSE https://www.suse.com/
-------------------------------------------------------------------
<<This happens because _I_ choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere)
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
|
