next/master boot: 296 boots: 62 failed, 230 passed with 4 conflicts (next-20171113)

[Guillaume Tucker]

On 14/11/17 19:53, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 9:10 AM, Guillaume Tucker
> <guillaume.tucker at collabora.com> wrote:
>> On 13/11/17 19:02, kernelci.org bot wrote:
>>>
>>> next/master boot: 296 boots: 62 failed, 230 passed with 4 conflicts
>>> (next-20171113)
>>>
>>> Full Boot Summary:
>>> https://kernelci.org/boot/all/job/next/branch/master/kernel/next-20171113/
>>> Full Build Summary:
>>> https://kernelci.org/build/next/branch/master/kernel/next-20171113/
>>>
>>> Tree: next
>>> Branch: master
>>> Git Describe: next-20171113
>>> Git Commit: c348a99ee55feac43b5b62a5957c6d8e2b6c3abe
>>> Git URL:
>>> http://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git
>>> Tested: 52 unique boards, 17 SoC families, 33 builds out of 213
>>>
>>> Boot Regressions Detected:
>>>
>>> arm:
>>>
>> [...]
>>>
>>>     multi_v7_defconfig:
>>
>> [...]
>>>
>>>         tegra124-nyan-big:
>>>             lab-collabora: failing since 9 days (last pass: next-20171102
>>> - first fail: next-20171103)
>>
>>
>>
>> There are several things failing on the tegra124-nyan-big, at
>> least I've isolated one with my latest bisection run:
>>
>> 6c78935777d12ead2d32adf3eb525a24faf02d04 is the first bad commit
>> commit 6c78935777d12ead2d32adf3eb525a24faf02d04
>> Author: Kees Cook <keescook at chromium.org>
>> Date:   Fri Nov 10 16:34:52 2017 +0100
>>
>>     video: fbdev: Convert timers to use timer_setup()
>>
>>
>> These boot tests are with multi_v7_defconfig with CONFIG_MODULES
>> and CONFIG_DRM_NOUVEAU disabled:
>>
>> * the first one on the revision mentioned above, fails:
>>   https://lava.collabora.co.uk/scheduler/job/987651
>>
>> * then the same but with the commit reverted, passes:
>>   https://lava.collabora.co.uk/scheduler/job/987652
>>
>> This was found using the still experimental automated bisection
>> tool for kernelci.org, I'm not sure yet how reliable the results
>> are.  I think the manual check with these 2 boots proves it, but
>> I haven't really investigated further than that.
>>
>> So I then did the same tests at the top of the branch, on the
>> next-20171113 tag:
>>
>> * next-20171113, fails but differently:
>>   https://lava.collabora.co.uk/scheduler/job/987653
>>
>> * next-20171113 with the commit reverted, still fails:
>>   https://lava.collabora.co.uk/scheduler/job/987654
>>
>> It's hard to tell whether the commit I mentioned got fixed
>> in-between, I guess it would be best to not have any boot failure
>> in any case.
>>
>> The next thing I'll try is start a bisection for the other
>> failure see on next-20171113 tag, with the commit above reverted
>> and see if it leads anywhere...
>>
>> Hope this helps!
>
> Thanks for the report! I believe this is fixed with:
>
> https://marc.info/?l=linux-fbdev&m=151056635200583&w=2
>
> and that commit appears in next-20171114. Please let me know if that
> doesn't fix it, though!

Thanks, I've applied this patch in-place and confirmed it did fix
the issue:

   https://lava.collabora.co.uk/scheduler/job/988891

Will move on to next-20171114 now.

Guillaume

>>> ---
>>> For more info write to <info at kernelci.org>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Kernel-build-reports mailing list
>>> Kernel-build-reports at lists.linaro.org
>>> https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-build-reports
>>>
>>
>
>
>