Re: ❌ FAIL: Test report?for?kernel?5.11.0-rc7 (arm-next)

[Veronika Kabatova]

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Will Deacon" <will at kernel.org>
> To: "Veronika Kabatova" <vkabatov at redhat.com>
> Cc: "catalin marinas" <catalin.marinas at arm.com>, "CKI Project" <cki-project at redhat.com>,
> linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org
> Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2021 7:56:03 PM
> Subject: Re: ❌ FAIL: Test	report?for?kernel?5.11.0-rc7 (arm-next)
> 
> On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 01:06:08PM -0500, Veronika Kabatova wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Will Deacon" <will at kernel.org>
> > > To: "Veronika Kabatova" <vkabatov at redhat.com>
> > > Cc: "catalin marinas" <catalin.marinas at arm.com>, "CKI Project"
> > > <cki-project at redhat.com>,
> > > linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org
> > > Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2021 6:31:34 PM
> > > Subject: Re: ❌ FAIL: Test report	for?kernel?5.11.0-rc7 (arm-next)
> > > 
> > > On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 12:07:23PM -0500, Veronika Kabatova wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 10:24:31AM -0500, Veronika Kabatova wrote:
> > > > > > Hi, I have a few results back:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > - resubmitted the same kernel: gets stuck in the same spot
> > > > > > - tried the new version pushed today: gets stuck in the same spot
> > > > > 
> > > > > That's odd, as I just received a pass report for that branch!
> > > > > 
> > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/r/cki.598435E2D5.M3C5MKJ1NV@redhat.com
> > > > > 
> > > > > Is it just flakey, perhaps? Obviously, that's not great either, but
> > > > > it
> > > > > will
> > > > > make bisection more challenging.
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > We have a large number of machines (both physical and virtual) and it's
> > > > impossible to run all tests on all of them, so they are randomly picked
> > > > as
> > > > long as they fit the distro and test requirements. The distribution for
> > > > ARM tree is 1 physical and 1 "any" machine (which usually ends up being
> > > > virtual). The jobs from the report you linked ran on different machines
> > > > and didn't pick the one that failed to boot previously, so I manually
> > > > forced my testing to pick that machine to eliminate some variables.
> > > 
> > > Ah thanks, I hadn't twigged that it was a different set of hosts each
> > > time.
> > > Makes sense.
> > > 
> > > > The machine in question can on course be somewhat flaky (hard to
> > > > eliminate
> > > > that possibility completely), but I checked our historical data and it
> > > > didn't fail to boot a single time other than with these two new
> > > > kernels.
> > > 
> > > So the first thing we should probably try is whether vanilla -rc7 fails
> > > on
> > > the machine causing us problems. If it does, then the arm64 queue for
> > > 5.12
> > > is out of the equation, if not then we can try a targetted bisection.
> > > 
> > > Would you be able to try v5.11-rc7 please?
> > 
> > Can do.
> 
> Brill, thanks.
> 
> > Someone snatched up the machine in the meanwhile and appears to have it
> > reserved till next Monday :/ I sincerely hope that they'll release it
> > sooner
> > and have queued up the test job with high priority. Will let you know right
> > as I get the results.
> 
> Just tell them the machine is broken and they really don't want to use it
> for anything important ;)
> 

Our wishes were granted by the lab fairy and the machine was returned
rather quickly :)

The 5.11-rc7 kernel boots.


Veronika

> Will
> 
> 
>