ap-common | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
This affects only x86 and only the branches that aren't linux-*, since
obviously the latter use whatever version they are using.
I compared the most recent linux-4.19 results with the most recent
linux-4.14 ones, and there was only one new failure (in 143841):
test-amd64-i386-qemuu-rhel6hvm-intel 12 guest-start/redhat.repeat fail REGR. vs. 143911
This step has failed twice in the web-visible history of this job on
4.19; and once recently in 4.14. Because of the low update rate of
these trees nowadays, these tests are a while ago and we don't have
the logs any more.
I think given that it's already not perfect this is not a blocker and
we should update osstest to 4.14.
CC: Roger Pau Monné <royger@FreeBSD.org>
CC: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
CC: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>
CC: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>
CC: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>
CC: Paul Durrant <paul.durrant@citrix.com>
Signed-off-by: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>
---
ap-common | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/ap-common b/ap-common
index 6ae7cce6..547b48ed 100644
--- a/ap-common
+++ b/ap-common
@@ -59,7 +59,7 @@
: ${PUSH_TREE_LINUX:=$XENBITS:/home/xen/git/linux-pvops.git}
: ${BASE_TREE_LINUX:=git://xenbits.xen.org/linux-pvops.git}
-: ${BASE_TAG_LINUX:=tested/linux-4.14}
+: ${BASE_TAG_LINUX:=tested/linux-4.19}
: ${BASE_TAG_LINUX_ARM:=tested/linux-arm-xen}
if [ "x${TREE_LINUX}" = x ]; then
--
2.11.0
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
On Thu, Jan 02, 2020 at 06:04:33PM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote: > This affects only x86 and only the branches that aren't linux-*, since > obviously the latter use whatever version they are using. > > I compared the most recent linux-4.19 results with the most recent > linux-4.14 ones, and there was only one new failure (in 143841): > test-amd64-i386-qemuu-rhel6hvm-intel 12 guest-start/redhat.repeat fail REGR. vs. 143911 > > This step has failed twice in the web-visible history of this job on > 4.19; and once recently in 4.14. Because of the low update rate of > these trees nowadays, these tests are a while ago and we don't have > the logs any more. > > I think given that it's already not perfect this is not a blocker and > we should update osstest to 4.14. > > CC: Roger Pau Monné <royger@FreeBSD.org> > CC: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com> > CC: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com> > CC: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com> > CC: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com> > CC: Paul Durrant <paul.durrant@citrix.com> > Signed-off-by: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com> Acked-by: Wei Liu <wl@xen.org> On a related note, the most recent Linux LTS is 5.4. It would be great if we start testing it in OSSTest and eventually switch to it. Wei. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
On Thu, Jan 02, 2020 at 06:04:33PM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote: > This affects only x86 and only the branches that aren't linux-*, since > obviously the latter use whatever version they are using. > > I compared the most recent linux-4.19 results with the most recent > linux-4.14 ones, and there was only one new failure (in 143841): > test-amd64-i386-qemuu-rhel6hvm-intel 12 guest-start/redhat.repeat fail REGR. vs. 143911 > > This step has failed twice in the web-visible history of this job on > 4.19; and once recently in 4.14. Because of the low update rate of > these trees nowadays, these tests are a while ago and we don't have > the logs any more. > > I think given that it's already not perfect this is not a blocker and > we should update osstest to 4.14. > ^^^^ Just a small note: typo? Shouldn't that be 4.19 ? -- Pasi _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
Pasi Kärkkäinen writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [OSSTEST PATCH] Switch to linux-4.19 by default (from 4.14)"): > On Thu, Jan 02, 2020 at 06:04:33PM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote: > > I think given that it's already not perfect this is not a blocker and > > we should update osstest to 4.14. > > ^^^^ > > Just a small note: typo? Shouldn't that be 4.19 ? Yes, well spotted. The actual code is right, luckily. Thanks, Ian. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
On Thu, Jan 02, 2020 at 06:04:33PM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote: > This affects only x86 and only the branches that aren't linux-*, since > obviously the latter use whatever version they are using. > > I compared the most recent linux-4.19 results with the most recent > linux-4.14 ones, and there was only one new failure (in 143841): > test-amd64-i386-qemuu-rhel6hvm-intel 12 guest-start/redhat.repeat fail REGR. vs. 143911 > > This step has failed twice in the web-visible history of this job on > 4.19; and once recently in 4.14. Because of the low update rate of > these trees nowadays, these tests are a while ago and we don't have > the logs any more. > > I think given that it's already not perfect this is not a blocker and > we should update osstest to 4.14. > > CC: Roger Pau Monné <royger@FreeBSD.org> > CC: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com> > CC: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com> > CC: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com> > CC: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com> > CC: Paul Durrant <paul.durrant@citrix.com> > Signed-off-by: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com> Acked-by: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@citrix.com> With this we could start adding pvh dom0 jobs :) Thanks, Roger. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
© 2016 - 2024 Red Hat, Inc.