Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-unstable test] 96330: regressions - trouble: blocked/broken/fail/pass
On 06/29/2016 06:58 AM, Ian Jackson wrote: Jan Beulich writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-unstable test] 96330: regressions - trouble: blocked/broken/fail/pass"): On 28.06.16 at 21:16, <osstest-ad...@xenproject.org> wrote: This latter one is objcopy -S -I binary -O elf64-little --rename-section=.data=.init.xsm_policy policy.bin policy.o ... :policy.o: Invalid bfd target Makefile:45: recipe for target 'policy.o' failed make[5]: Leaving directory '/home/osstest/build.96330.build-armhf-xsm/xen/xen/xsm/flask' make[5]: *** [policy.o] Error 1 which looks to be the not really suitable use of elf64-little in commit 08cffe6696 ("xsm: add a default policy to .init.data"). Since it's not immediately clear how to fix this preferably without ugly ifdef-ery in the makefile, I think we better revert this for now. Opinions? Yes, I think reverting it for now is the right answer. That's fine; I am planning on sending a v3 of this patch that drops the use of objcopy for a python script converting the policy to an array in a .c file. This also eliminates the linker script changes. -- Daniel De Graaf National Security Agency ___ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-unstable test] 96330: regressions - trouble: blocked/broken/fail/pass
Jan Beulich writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-unstable test] 96330: regressions - trouble: blocked/broken/fail/pass"): > On 28.06.16 at 21:16, <osstest-ad...@xenproject.org> wrote: > This latter one is > > objcopy -S -I binary -O elf64-little --rename-section=.data=.init.xsm_policy > policy.bin policy.o ... > :policy.o: Invalid bfd target > Makefile:45: recipe for target 'policy.o' failed > make[5]: Leaving directory > '/home/osstest/build.96330.build-armhf-xsm/xen/xen/xsm/flask' > make[5]: *** [policy.o] Error 1 > > which looks to be the not really suitable use of elf64-little in > commit 08cffe6696 ("xsm: add a default policy to .init.data"). > Since it's not immediately clear how to fix this preferably > without ugly ifdef-ery in the makefile, I think we better revert > this for now. Opinions? Yes, I think reverting it for now is the right answer. Ian. ___ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-unstable test] 96330: regressions - trouble: blocked/broken/fail/pass
>>> On 28.06.16 at 21:16,wrote: > flight 96330 xen-unstable real [real] > http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/96330/ > > Regressions :-( > > Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, > including tests which could not be run: > test-armhf-armhf-libvirt-raw 3 host-install(3) broken REGR. vs. > 96296 > build-armhf-xsm 5 xen-build fail REGR. vs. > 96296 This latter one is objcopy -S -I binary -O elf64-little --rename-section=.data=.init.xsm_policy policy.bin policy.o objcopygcc -O1 -fno-omit-frame-pointer -marm -DBUILD_ID -g -fno-strict-aliasing -std=gnu99 -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -Wdeclaration-after-statement -Wno-unused-but-set-variable -Wno-unused-local-typedefs -nostdinc -fno-builtin -fno-common -Werror -Wredundant-decls -Wno-pointer-arith -pipe -g -D__XEN__ -include /home/osstest/build.96330.build-armhf-xsm/xen/xen/include/xen/config.h '-D__OBJECT_FILE__="domain_build.o"' -Wa,--strip-local-absolute -fno-optimize-sibling-calls -fno-omit-frame-pointer -MMD -MF ./.domain_build.o.d -msoft-float -mcpu=cortex-a15 -I/home/osstest/build.96330.build-armhf-xsm/xen/xen/include -fno-stack-protector -fno-exceptions -Wnested-externs -DGCC_HAS_VISIBILITY_ATTRIBUTE -c domain_build.c -o domain_build.o :policy.o: Invalid bfd target Makefile:45: recipe for target 'policy.o' failed make[5]: Leaving directory '/home/osstest/build.96330.build-armhf-xsm/xen/xen/xsm/flask' make[5]: *** [policy.o] Error 1 which looks to be the not really suitable use of elf64-little in commit 08cffe6696 ("xsm: add a default policy to .init.data"). Since it's not immediately clear how to fix this preferably without ugly ifdef-ery in the makefile, I think we better revert this for now. Opinions? Jan ___ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
[Xen-devel] [xen-unstable test] 96330: regressions - trouble: blocked/broken/fail/pass
flight 96330 xen-unstable real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/96330/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: test-armhf-armhf-libvirt-raw 3 host-install(3) broken REGR. vs. 96296 build-armhf-xsm 5 xen-build fail REGR. vs. 96296 Regressions which are regarded as allowable (not blocking): test-armhf-armhf-xl-rtds 15 guest-start/debian.repeat fail REGR. vs. 96296 build-amd64-rumpuserxen 6 xen-buildfail like 96296 build-i386-rumpuserxen6 xen-buildfail like 96296 test-amd64-amd64-xl-rtds 9 debian-install fail like 96296 test-amd64-i386-xl-qemut-win7-amd64 16 guest-stop fail like 96296 test-amd64-amd64-xl-qemut-win7-amd64 16 guest-stop fail like 96296 test-amd64-amd64-xl-qemuu-win7-amd64 16 guest-stop fail like 96296 test-amd64-i386-xl-qemuu-win7-amd64 16 guest-stop fail like 96296 Tests which did not succeed, but are not blocking: test-amd64-i386-rumpuserxen-i386 1 build-check(1) blocked n/a test-amd64-amd64-rumpuserxen-amd64 1 build-check(1) blocked n/a test-armhf-armhf-libvirt-xsm 1 build-check(1) blocked n/a test-armhf-armhf-xl-xsm 1 build-check(1) blocked n/a test-amd64-amd64-xl-pvh-amd 11 guest-start fail never pass test-amd64-amd64-xl-pvh-intel 11 guest-start fail never pass test-amd64-amd64-libvirt 12 migrate-support-checkfail never pass test-amd64-amd64-qemuu-nested-amd 16 debian-hvm-install/l1/l2 fail never pass test-amd64-i386-libvirt-xsm 12 migrate-support-checkfail never pass test-amd64-amd64-libvirt-vhd 11 migrate-support-checkfail never pass test-armhf-armhf-libvirt-qcow2 11 migrate-support-checkfail never pass test-armhf-armhf-libvirt-qcow2 13 guest-saverestorefail never pass test-amd64-amd64-libvirt-xsm 12 migrate-support-checkfail never pass test-amd64-i386-libvirt-qemuu-debianhvm-amd64-xsm 10 migrate-support-check fail never pass test-armhf-armhf-xl-cubietruck 12 migrate-support-checkfail never pass test-armhf-armhf-xl-cubietruck 13 saverestore-support-checkfail never pass test-armhf-armhf-libvirt 14 guest-saverestorefail never pass test-armhf-armhf-libvirt 12 migrate-support-checkfail never pass test-amd64-i386-libvirt 12 migrate-support-checkfail never pass test-armhf-armhf-xl-arndale 12 migrate-support-checkfail never pass test-armhf-armhf-xl-arndale 13 saverestore-support-checkfail never pass test-armhf-armhf-xl-credit2 13 saverestore-support-checkfail never pass test-armhf-armhf-xl-credit2 12 migrate-support-checkfail never pass test-armhf-armhf-xl 12 migrate-support-checkfail never pass test-armhf-armhf-xl 13 saverestore-support-checkfail never pass test-armhf-armhf-xl-multivcpu 13 saverestore-support-checkfail never pass test-armhf-armhf-xl-multivcpu 12 migrate-support-checkfail never pass test-amd64-amd64-libvirt-qemuu-debianhvm-amd64-xsm 10 migrate-support-check fail never pass test-armhf-armhf-xl-vhd 11 migrate-support-checkfail never pass test-armhf-armhf-xl-vhd 12 saverestore-support-checkfail never pass test-armhf-armhf-xl-rtds 13 saverestore-support-checkfail never pass test-armhf-armhf-xl-rtds 12 migrate-support-checkfail never pass version targeted for testing: xen 08cffe6696c047123bd552e095163924c8ef4353 baseline version: xen 8384dc2d95538c5910d98db3df3ff5448bf0af48 Last test of basis96296 2016-06-27 01:55:48 Z1 days Testing same since96315 2016-06-27 14:13:25 Z1 days2 attempts People who touched revisions under test: Daniel De GraafJulien Grall jobs: build-amd64-xsm pass build-armhf-xsm fail build-i386-xsm pass build-amd64 pass build-armhf pass build-i386 pass build-amd64-libvirt pass build-armhf-libvirt pass build-i386-libvirt pass build-amd64-oldkern pass build-i386-oldkern pass build-amd64-prev