This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Home Products Support Community News


Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-4.0-testing test] 2036: regressions - FAIL

To: Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-4.0-testing test] 2036: regressions - FAIL
From: Pasi Kärkkäinen <pasik@xxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2010 15:00:35 +0300
Cc: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx>, "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Fri, 20 Aug 2010 05:04:42 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <C89415F0.1E9A7%keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <19566.21722.611932.26802@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <C89415F0.1E9A7%keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 11:22:24AM +0100, Keir Fraser wrote:
> On 20/08/2010 11:11, "Ian Jackson" <Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> Well it looks better than the previous run, and the "regressions" could be
> >> temporary networking issues in the test setup?
> > 
> > I don't think that's what's going on.  There are no other symptoms of
> > any networking problems.
> > 
> > Can we release 4.0.1 with the default kernel branch switched back ?
> I dunno, maybe we should just get the main recommended pv_ops branch
> actually working. How hard can it be to fix, so that it passes what is
> frankly a featherweight series of tests.

Yeah, I don't think going back to 2.6.31 is a good option.
2.6.31 is abandoned by kernel.org already.

2.6.32 is the long-term maintained kernel.

-- Pasi

Xen-devel mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>