On Thu, Mar 02, 2017 at 04:54:26PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 02/03/2017 16:39, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 07:17:39PM +0000, Peter Maydell wrote: > >> On 28 February 2017 at 19:12, Eduardo Habkost <ehabk...@redhat.com> wrote: > >>> I saw a failure on x86-pull-request that seemed to be because of > >>> vhost-user-test[1]. However, after restarting the job, it > >>> passed[2]. > >> > >> I'm currently processing a patch which (hopefully) fixes > >> vhost-user-test's intermittent failures: > >> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/732747/ > > > > I'm not sure it will solve the issues on hosts without KVM. As > > far as I can see, if vhost-user-test is working without KVM, it > > is working by accident. > > Well, it has worked for a while before the patch.
Before which patch? > As long as you don't > overwrite code with vhost-user data and then try to run that data, > things will be fine. Just not something you can use in practice, but it > works in tests. Earlier this week I saw the wait_for_fds assertion (mentioned at the thread above) on a travis-ci job again, and I was suspecting it was the same vhost_set_mem_table() + TCG error seen at the thread above. Unfortunately travis-ci overwrote the previous logs when I restarted the job, and now I can't confirm if it was really the same vhost_set_mem_table() error. I guess we'll have to simply wait and see if it fails again. -- Eduardo
