From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out-186.mta0.migadu.com (out-186.mta0.migadu.com [91.218.175.186]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6541A21C188 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2025 22:45:05 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=91.218.175.186 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1743461108; cv=none; b=nYmhbSJ0O6KJ/foQILtp54mbW2NdSnZcBOMXv1+tYglHooJgWLqWCpKSwRy7EdOiM+shGBX8XRcVPwxSqsHw/1eGmfnvhTnULS7vkfaareLwJKy9pJ0VHEqx6PXL+m512+czLHv8bSO1FgIQRk77eajICv1MxCQXCkIaaqGv5/U= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1743461108; c=relaxed/simple; bh=4GUF9RGQCtSfvuNAdauXAgAl8f612VjY80YKNqHmhPg=; h=MIME-Version:Date:Content-Type:From:Message-ID:Subject:To:Cc: In-Reply-To:References; b=PpXNyzd6VaEVqQuc2lO6EIH1UHW83QZJo+wOhvxjnPTjx2Z/+hcNw2Ti0K5lvgU0Qtrou5UkDV5vJrkIkk6RGxYV06LX7Wp0wwCCoUOfYFz8HcG1lS0nmf8UFzrcPRbHGk4ZLJt5L3/P6Uu5A4LbEbSNzeK0qHM0WGGhWlta9q8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b=Zx2ajXAX; arc=none smtp.client-ip=91.218.175.186 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b="Zx2ajXAX" Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: bpf@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1743461103; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=7YNj7l7IZ/dWAKyICg2JZzfB/KWwR6GHByYOJhLbau4=; b=Zx2ajXAX1kh2cqLfKEfn7rkYeofs3eCzR7h8wUSnyC7d3xqOuusToCUI5Q25Z7LBZgHu5K JoieaWiqzb44c3ywYEnI23R92fl39tNPxiy5DUM8e0MP7aFi7CRwXjF1ynwiuZ31Z9qTcN 9n3rBMAGWJ7LA4zUUgz0yiYo7Nn3u84= Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2025 22:45:01 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. From: "Ihor Solodrai" Message-ID: <7d55acbf6e6b20f9e8d679883c1e77391e80b304@linux.dev> TLS-Required: No Subject: Re: s390x: selftests/bpf are failing on CI To: "Ilya Leoshkevich" Cc: "Yonghong Song" , "Song Liu" , "Alexei Starovoitov" , bpf@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@meta.com In-Reply-To: <7adb418e282468fcd5dc10c05790614e622579d4@linux.dev> References: <7adb418e282468fcd5dc10c05790614e622579d4@linux.dev> X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT On 3/31/25 3:25 PM, iii wrote: > On 2025-03-31 20:25, Ihor Solodrai wrote: >> Hi Ilya, >> >> After recent merges from upstream, CI started failing both on bpf and >> bpf-next trees. Yonghong Song and Song Liu submitted a couple of fixes >> that are already applied to bpf tree, but there are still failures on >> s390x. >> >> https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/actions/runs/14163772245 >> >> Could you please investigate? >> >> [...] > > Hi Ihor, > > Thanks for the heads up. > I tried this manually with the kernel commit 07be1f644ff9 and the tests= are passing: > > # ./test_progs -t attach_probe > > #12/1 attach_probe/manual-default:OK > #12/2 attach_probe/manual-legacy:OK > #12/3 attach_probe/manual-perf:OK > #12/4 attach_probe/manual-link:OK > #12/5 attach_probe/auto:OK > #12/6 attach_probe/kprobe-sleepable:OK > #12/7 attach_probe/uprobe-lib:OK > #12/8 attach_probe/uprobe-sleepable:OK > #12/9 attach_probe/uprobe-ref_ctr:OK > #12 attach_probe:OK > Summary: 1/9 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED > > So this must be a config issue. > I'm not sure what is causing __s390x_sys_nanosleep to be notrace, but t= his doesn't look normal. Hi, thank you for taking a look. Do they succeed if you run prior tests too? I remember situations when a test would succeed when run independently, but fail when running after other tests. > > I also see that the newer test runs are green: > > https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/actions/runs/14182247375 > > Do you know if something changed in the meantime? Yeah, I just disabled the tests failing on s390x for now to unblock the CI. This is temporary. A little off-topic: it looks like ebpf runners are offline again, could be due to recent github runner version bump. > > Best regards, > Ilya