[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [PATCH 00/21] x86: Trenchboot Secure Launch DRTM (Xen)
On Thu, Apr 24, 2025 at 12:54:41PM +0200, Nicola Vetrini wrote: > > On 4/23/25 23:53, Sergii Dmytruk wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 23, 2025 at 10:11:35PM +0200, Nicola Vetrini wrote: > > > On 2025-04-23 20:45, Sergii Dmytruk wrote: > > > > On Wed, Apr 23, 2025 at 02:38:37PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote: > > > > > On 22/04/2025 6:14 pm, Andrew Cooper wrote: > > > > > > I've stripped out the sha2 patch and fixed up to use the existing > > > > > > sha2, > > > > > > then kicked off some CI testing: > > > > > > > > > > > > https://gitlab.com/xen-project/hardware/xen-staging/-/pipelines/1780285393 > > > > > > https://cirrus-ci.com/build/5452335868018688 > > > > > > > > > > > > When the dust has settled, I'll talk you through the failures. > > > > > And here we go. Interestingly, the FreeBSD testing was entirely > > > > > happy, > > > > > and that is the rare way around. > > > > > > > > > > For Gitlab, there are several areas. > > > > > > > > > > First, for MISRA. In the job logs, you want the "Browse current > > > > > reports:" link which will give you full details, but it's all pretty > > > > > simple stuff. > > > > Thanks, but that link gives me a list of 5096 failures all over the code > > > > base. Is there any way to see a diff against master? > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > yes, you can define selections of violations introduced on previously > > > clean > > > guidelines by clicking on the "ECLAIR" button on the upper right. See [1] > > > which is the result of defining the "clean_added" selection shown in the > > > attached screenshot. If you have other questions please let me know. > > Hi, > > > > not sure why, but using "added" left 4861 violations. Picking `_NO_TAG` > > instead seemingly left only new violations. Maybe that's something > > specific to this particular run. Either way, I can go through the list > > now and know how to adjust it. Thank you for the instructions. > > > I'm not sure I fully understand this. This is what I see on x86: the ones > still shown are those rules where the CI is blocking and new issues have > been introduced by that pipeline run (of course a different pipeline may > yield different results). Only new violations are blocking, so that is why I > filtered out the rest in this case. My bad, I still had "Hide" instead of "Show" in the selection. Other comboboxes are also hard to see but I wasn't even looking for one in the title. Thanks again. > > > Thanks, > > > Nicola > > > > > > [1] > > > https://saas.eclairit.com:3787/fs/var/local/eclair/xen-project.ecdf/xen-project/hardware/xen-staging/ECLAIR_normal/andrew/tb-v1.1/ARM64/9791028027/PROJECT.ecd;/by_service.html#service&kind{"select":true,"selection":{"hiddenAreaKinds":[],"hiddenSubareaKinds":[],"show":true,"selector":{"enabled":true,"negated":false,"kind":1,"children":[{"enabled":true,"negated":false,"kind":0,"domain":"clean","inputs":[{"enabled":true,"text":"added"}]}]}}}
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |