On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 8:49 AM, Toshi Kani <toshi.kani(a)hpe.com&gt; wrote: > On Tue, 2016-03-29 at 10:46 -0400, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: >> On 03/29/2016 10:19 AM, Toshi Kani wrote: >> > On Tue, 2016-03-29 at 12:34 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: >> > >> > > > I'd appreciate if someone can test this patch-set on Xen to verify >> > > > that there is no change in "x86/PAT: Configuration [0-7] .." >> > > > message in dmesg. >> > > So I don't have a Xen setup, but hopefully such testing will happen >> > > once these changes show up in linux-next, tomorrow or so. >> > I will address if any issue is found in testing. >> >> I ran a subset of out nightly test. Nobody died. >> >> So this all looks good. (It actually may have also fixed another bug >> that was reported recently by Olaf, copied here) > > Cool! Thanks Boris! Hoping Boris or someone on the Xen front would test this prior to merging helps but it also slows us down, a while ago we discussed the

possibility of getting Linux Xen guests automatically tested as part of 0-day, this way then when a developer (in this case Toshi) pushes to his own tree, he'd be able to just sit and wait for the results, without having to hope Boris or someone goes out and tests.

Its a major undertaking to get Linux Xen guests boot strapped into

0-day, however such prospects were raised a while ago and it seems we may be able to get there. Just wanted to send a reminder about this possibility, and highlight this patch set as an ideal candidate where a proactive test could have helped as well. I proactively caught the original Xen issue, but git logs shows we are not doing so great in this area, so any help on the Xen side as well to help with 0-day integration would be appreciated. I'll follow up on another thread on that.

Luis _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel(a)lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 11:58 AM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk(a)oracle.com&gt; wrote: > On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 11:02:13AM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 8:49 AM, Toshi Kani <toshi.kani(a)hpe.com&gt; wrote: >> > On Tue, 2016-03-29 at 10:46 -0400, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: >> >> On 03/29/2016 10:19 AM, Toshi Kani wrote: >> >> > On Tue, 2016-03-29 at 12:34 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: >> >> > >> >> > > > I'd appreciate if someone can test this patch-set on Xen to verify >> >> > > > that there is no change in "x86/PAT: Configuration [0-7] .." >> >> > > > message in dmesg. >> >> > > So I don't have a Xen setup, but hopefully such testing will happen >> >> > > once these changes show up in linux-next, tomorrow or so. >> >> > I will address if any issue is found in testing. >> >> >> >> I ran a subset of out nightly test. Nobody died. >> >> >> >> So this all looks good. (It actually may have also fixed another bug >> >> that was reported recently by Olaf, copied here) >> > >> > Cool! Thanks Boris! >> >> Hoping Boris or someone on the Xen front would test this prior to >> merging helps but it also slows us down, a while ago we discussed the > > Boris did test it _before_ it was merged. Yes, my point being that we should not need Boris to test collateral Xen patches.

>> possibility of getting Linux Xen guests automatically tested as part >> of 0-day, this way then when a developer (in this case Toshi) pushes >> to his own tree, he'd be able to just sit and wait for the results, >> without having to hope Boris or someone goes out and tests. > > In Fedora you just need to do: > > #yum install xen > #reboot > And pick the Xen option. > > Probably the same thing with Debian and Ubuntu - just 'apt-get install xen' We can't expect everyone to do that. >> Its a major undertaking to get Linux Xen guests boot strapped into 0-day, > > It is? If its really trivial then you give me the impression you can help with its integration. 0-day is open after all.