[Xen-devel] [xen-unstable test] 122621: trouble: broken/fail/pass

flight 122621 xen-unstable real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/122621/ Failures and problems with tests :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: test-arm64-arm64-xl-xsm broken test-arm64-arm64-xl

[Xen-devel] [linux-linus test] 122618: regressions - trouble: broken/fail/pass

flight 122618 linux-linus real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/122618/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: test-arm64-arm64-xl-xsm broken test-arm64-arm64-xl-credit2

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v4] x86/cpu: Add supports for zhaoxin x86 platform

From: DavidWang Zhaoxin is a x86 IC designer. Its SOC products support both CPU virtualization and I/O virtualization, which are compatible with Intel VMX and VT-d respectively. Zhaoxin has 'Shanghai' CPU vendor ID. Signed-off-by: DavidWang ---

[Xen-devel] domain_crash_sync vs "plain crash"

When I'm performing some hypercalls with some "unexpected" parameters (robustness test) sometimes the guest is explicitly "killed" by xen calling the domain_crash(), but sometimes the guest just crash without any explicit message on dmesg or logs. Are those "plain crashes" an expected behavior

[Xen-devel] [qemu-mainline test] 122615: trouble: broken/fail/pass

flight 122615 qemu-mainline real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/122615/ Failures and problems with tests :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: test-arm64-arm64-libvirt-xsm broken

[Xen-devel] [linux-4.14 test] 122613: trouble: blocked/broken/fail/pass

flight 122613 linux-4.14 real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/122613/ Failures and problems with tests :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: build-arm64-libvirt broken build-arm64-pvops

Re: [Xen-devel] reboot driver domain, vifX.Y = NO-CARRIER?

Hi Marek, On Sat, May 05, 2018 at 01:03:15AM +0200, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote: > On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 06:13:25PM -0400, Rich Persaud wrote: > > > On May 1, 2018, at 08:53, Jason Cooper wrote: > > > > > > add the link to xen-users thread of me talking to myself.

[Xen-devel] [xen-4.10-testing test] 122608: regressions - trouble: blocked/broken/fail/pass

flight 122608 xen-4.10-testing real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/122608/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: build-arm64-xsm broken build-arm64-pvops

[Xen-devel] [libvirt test] 122611: regressions - trouble: blocked/broken/fail/pass

flight 122611 libvirt real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/122611/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: test-arm64-arm64-libvirt-qcow2 broken test-arm64-arm64-libvirt

[Xen-devel] [xen-4.7-testing test] 122606: trouble: broken/fail/pass

flight 122606 xen-4.7-testing real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/122606/ Failures and problems with tests :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: test-arm64-arm64-libvirt-xsm broken

[Xen-devel] [xen-unstable-coverity test] 122623: all pass - PUSHED

flight 122623 xen-unstable-coverity real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/122623/ Perfect :-) All tests in this flight passed as required version targeted for testing: xen e38e285a51c805cfeee4693962df23e39b3c3bd7 baseline version: xen