[Xen-devel] [linux-linus test] 113796: regressions - FAIL

flight 113796 linux-linus real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/113796/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: build-i386-xsm6 xen-buildfail REGR. vs. 113765 build-armhf

[Xen-devel] [xen-unstable test] 113791: regressions - FAIL

flight 113791 xen-unstable real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/113791/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: test-amd64-i386-xl-qemuu-win7-amd64 18 guest-start/win.repeat fail REGR. vs. 113387

[Xen-devel] [ovmf test] 113798: regressions - FAIL

flight 113798 ovmf real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/113798/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: test-amd64-amd64-xl-qemuu-ovmf-amd64 16 guest-localmigrate/x10 fail REGR. vs. 113767 version targeted

[Xen-devel] [qemu-mainline baseline-only test] 72150: regressions - trouble: blocked/broken/fail/pass

This run is configured for baseline tests only. flight 72150 qemu-mainline real [real] http://osstest.xs.citrite.net/~osstest/testlogs/logs/72150/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: test-amd64-i386-xl-qemuu-win7-amd64 16

[Xen-devel] [ovmf test] 113801: all pass - PUSHED

flight 113801 ovmf real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/113801/ Perfect :-) All tests in this flight passed as required version targeted for testing: ovmf 5b7c22450591a9e20ff54b970c11087ccfff563d baseline version: ovmf

[Xen-devel] [xen-unstable test] 113800: regressions - FAIL

flight 113800 xen-unstable real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/113800/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: test-amd64-i386-xl-qemuu-win7-amd64 18 guest-start/win.repeat fail in 113791 REGR. vs. 113387

Re: [Xen-devel] [Qemu-devel] xen/disk: don't leak stack data via response ring

23.09.2017 19:05, Michael Tokarev wrote: > 28.06.2017 01:04, Stefano Stabellini wrote: >> Rather than constructing a local structure instance on the stack, fill >> the fields directly on the shared ring, just like other (Linux) >> backends do. Build on the fact that all response structure flavors

[Xen-devel] [linux-linus test] 113783: regressions - FAIL

flight 113783 linux-linus real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/113783/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: build-armhf 6 xen-build fail in 113779 REGR. vs. 113765 Tests which are

[Xen-devel] [xen-unstable-coverity test] 113792: all pass - PUSHED

flight 113792 xen-unstable-coverity real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/113792/ Perfect :-) All tests in this flight passed as required version targeted for testing: xen 7ff9661b904a3af618dc2a2b8cdec46be6930308 baseline version: xen

[Xen-devel] [qemu-mainline test] 113784: tolerable FAIL - PUSHED

flight 113784 qemu-mainline real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/113784/ Failures :-/ but no regressions. Tests which are failing intermittently (not blocking): test-armhf-armhf-xl-cubietruck 6 xen-installfail in 113780 pass in 113784

[Xen-devel] [xen-unstable test] 113781: regressions - FAIL

flight 113781 xen-unstable real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/113781/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: test-amd64-i386-xl-qemut-win7-amd64 18 guest-start/win.repeat fail REGR. vs. 113387 Tests which

Re: [Xen-devel] x86: PIE support and option to extend KASLR randomization

Hi! > > We do need to consider how we want modules to fit into whatever model we > > choose, though. They can be adjacent, or we could go with a more > > traditional dynamic link model where the modules can be separate, and > > chained together with the main kernel via the GOT. > > So I believe

[Xen-devel] [ovmf test] 113806: all pass - PUSHED

flight 113806 ovmf real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/113806/ Perfect :-) All tests in this flight passed as required version targeted for testing: ovmf 79777358cd5dbdbb267ebd02405584321292f06a baseline version: ovmf

[Xen-devel] [ovmf baseline-only test] 72151: all pass

This run is configured for baseline tests only. flight 72151 ovmf real [real] http://osstest.xs.citrite.net/~osstest/testlogs/logs/72151/ Perfect :-) All tests in this flight passed as required version targeted for testing: ovmf 5b7c22450591a9e20ff54b970c11087ccfff563d baseline

[Xen-devel] [ovmf baseline-only test] 72152: all pass

This run is configured for baseline tests only. flight 72152 ovmf real [real] http://osstest.xs.citrite.net/~osstest/testlogs/logs/72152/ Perfect :-) All tests in this flight passed as required version targeted for testing: ovmf 79777358cd5dbdbb267ebd02405584321292f06a baseline

[Xen-devel] [linux-linus test] 113804: regressions - FAIL

flight 113804 linux-linus real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/113804/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: test-amd64-i386-xl-qemuu-win7-amd64 16 guest-localmigrate/x10 fail REGR. vs. 113765 Regressions

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 0/2] ARM: ACPI: IORT: Hide SMMU from hardware domain's IORT table

Hi Andre, On 9/22/2017 7:42 PM, Andre Przywara wrote: Hi Manish, On 11/09/17 22:33, mja...@caviumnetworks.com wrote: From: Manish Jaggi The set is divided into two patches. First one calculates the size of IORT while second one writes the IORT table itself. It would be