From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932169AbcEKJsq (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 May 2016 05:48:46 -0400 Received: from mail-wm0-f49.google.com ([74.125.82.49]:38085 "EHLO mail-wm0-f49.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932090AbcEKJso (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 May 2016 05:48:44 -0400 From: Kevin Hilman To: Greg Kroah-Hartman Cc: "kernelci.org bot" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux@roeck-us.net, shuah.kh@samsung.com, patches@kernelci.org, stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.5 00/88] 4.5.4-stable review Organization: BayLibre References: <20160509071952.129092535@linuxfoundation.org> <5730411d.47afc20a.a55a6.ffffa291@mx.google.com> <20160509080648.GA30721@kroah.com> Date: Wed, 11 May 2016 10:45:17 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20160509080648.GA30721@kroah.com> (Greg Kroah-Hartman's message of "Mon, 9 May 2016 10:06:48 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (darwin) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Greg Kroah-Hartman writes: > On Mon, May 09, 2016 at 12:49:49AM -0700, kernelci.org bot wrote: >> stable-queue boot: 269 boots: 6 failed, 247 passed with 16 offline (v4.5.3-88-gdb49c07fbfff) >> >> Full Boot Summary: https://kernelci.org/boot/all/job/stable-queue/kernel/v4.5.3-88-gdb49c07fbfff/ >> Full Build Summary: https://kernelci.org/build/stable-queue/kernel/v4.5.3-88-gdb49c07fbfff/ >> >> Tree: stable-queue >> Branch: local/linux-4.5.y.queue >> Git Describe: v4.5.3-88-gdb49c07fbfff >> Git Commit: db49c07fbffff689c30ce13696cdd8326d4f80a8 >> Git URL: git://server.roeck-us.net/git/linux-stable.git >> Tested: 65 unique boards, 21 SoC families, 22 builds out of 108 >> >> Boot Failures Detected: https://kernelci.org/boot/?v4.5.3-88-gdb49c07fbfff&fail >> >> arm: >> >> multi_v7_defconfig+CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING=y: >> vexpress-v2p-ca9: 1 failed lab >> >> sunxi_defconfig: >> sun7i-a20-cubieboard2_rootfs:nfs: 1 failed lab >> >> socfpga_defconfig: >> socfpga_cyclone5_socrates: 1 failed lab >> >> multi_v7_defconfig+CONFIG_EFI=y: >> imx53-qsrb: 1 failed lab >> imx6dl-riotboard: 1 failed lab >> socfpga_cyclone5_socrates: 1 failed lab > > I still don't know how to intrepret these, sorry. > > What does "1 failed lab" mean? What can I do with this? > > I looked at one of these "failures": > https://kernelci.org/boot/vexpress-v2p-ca9/job/stable-queue/kernel/v4.5.3-88-gdb49c07fbfff/defconfig/multi_v7_defconfig+CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING=y/lab/lab-baylibre-seattle/?_id=572fdd1e59b51453c3af381d > > and I can't really understand what is going on here, what should I be > looking for? Normally, this should be very easy for you: any non-zero number of failures indicates a regression. However, we've recently added a few more board farms to kernel CI which have boards that work with newer kernels, but not older/stable kernels. We need to blacklist these new boards from stable testing until they are known to work, so they don't show up as false positives. Sorry for the noise. Until we sort out the blacklisting, I'll try to follow-up on these with an interpretation of the restuls. Kevin