From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pf1-f176.google.com (mail-pf1-f176.google.com [209.85.210.176]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F3CB6443D for ; Mon, 31 Oct 2022 22:21:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pf1-f176.google.com with SMTP id f140so11914561pfa.1 for ; Mon, 31 Oct 2022 15:21:58 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=chromium.org; s=google; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=uP+5AwDT7kNW1wI4c+CXjsqbrZpHnHxypFRWcsC5nCs=; b=BmwkDZ6x4Ex3KSLNq7tiqWKFJhAAOM6PgfFphPqMxH5RA08U55ql85fM5GjpWbwKLn lJyqXoTNPTIFrIFmG3B0k8v4q4oXXykmbWyTIqbJrD8yzqKl+lgqC1szWMdpMrP87Uup hTRzRUmRiRRbpVgMM4Nc21nL2HpPAVJgEQki0= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=uP+5AwDT7kNW1wI4c+CXjsqbrZpHnHxypFRWcsC5nCs=; b=e3an8rTd5U+lamgS2ZQF/k5zxdeHP9ALvf/zUx25jZOlYvku5OPapf9dbkaHsZtFel ZMHCujo8Xj/5xLiTqgdph8/9oNdSIw3JMGHiZBFdhxab/S1hyqeLF45AfQKh0uouRm8T DCxK/uylyMPUXP++yFu3y2XL4UyckKJfg2wG3lgfLR2ExQ4CcI3Vu74CHs+buUzDr49R +2UNUivaonq8uIn3DM9/N8LXUyCwbWrwHBiKXxclPic6/cxA1Razzb2CTZTh3xq0Kebp qMp6IM4VnH3qwXejmC7E57wDr6cZ5DzsnjoLmSpE1ijiOW5l97+535NnX8kc8GDKAlN8 mzag== X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf1ZgWu29Su4ggbfJF1OYaDACOuQpcpJpxmPMcuKsagAEr/NPbNQ FrYdLrOKaBORrdpLUrhDoa1fMg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM51Y769FlPe9UzSXWWTlfI5JKrIs0Um3XV4dUwKSe6l3ImUr8aoC1dSNG6aFZDR4S+dUBPxaw== X-Received: by 2002:a63:4283:0:b0:457:dced:8ba3 with SMTP id p125-20020a634283000000b00457dced8ba3mr14594934pga.220.1667254918484; Mon, 31 Oct 2022 15:21:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from google.com ([2620:15c:9d:2:cf9d:6561:637d:2194]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id nh16-20020a17090b365000b0020a825fc912sm4683660pjb.45.2022.10.31.15.21.57 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 31 Oct 2022 15:21:57 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2022 15:21:55 -0700 From: Brian Norris To: Mark Brown Cc: kernelci-results@groups.io, "kernelci.org bot" , kernel-build-reports@lists.linaro.org, chrome-platform@lists.linux.dev, eballetbo@gmail.com, bleung@chromium.org, groeck@chromium.org, pmalani@chromium.org, tzungbi@google.com Subject: Re: chrome-platform/for-kernelci baseline: 98 runs, 5 regressions (v6.1-rc1-5-g27b86a65cd16) Message-ID: References: <635f6274.170a0220.79b7b.5d1a@mx.google.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: chrome-platform@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 09:37:28PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote: > On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 10:40:25AM -0700, Brian Norris wrote: > > On Sun, Oct 30, 2022 at 10:51 PM kernelci.org bot wrote: > > > > > > chrome-platform/for-kernelci baseline: 98 runs, 5 regressions (v6.1-rc1-5-g27b86a65cd16) > > > Does anybody look at these? It's a bit weird to see "5 regressions", > > and then to look back on the last few weeks (probably months) and see > > the same errors... > > Nobody seems to care about a lot of the Chromebook stuff AFAICT. :( Well, if I/we are ever going to change that, it'd be nice to get a little further on the below questions still: > > > Details: https://kernelci.org/test/job/chrome-platform/branch/for-kernelci/kernel/v6.1-rc1-5-g27b86a65cd16/plan/baseline/ > > > Where can I find the test cases? (i.e., what's determining a "failure" > > for one of these?) > > The first place to go is the details link above, though it's a bit less > clear for the non-baseline tests you should at least be able to see > what's going on on the console which will often help with finding the > testsuite, or the error messages printed are descriptive as to what > they were looking for specifically. The kernelci-core repo contains all > the stuff to map from a test name inot running something (often with > external assistance) but there's lots of templating in the way. Thanks. I already looked at most/all of those links. And I was first going for the "baseline" tests, since those seem pretty basic, and if we can't pass those, we're probably totally lost. > > As a small guess, I see that we're missing some common configs, like: > > > CONFIG_PHY_ROCKCHIP_DP > > > This sometimes means that the display subsystem (and therefore audio > > subsystem that relies on DP for one of its components) is not going to > > fully set itself up properly. Usually things can still sort of work, > > but I don't really know what the tests are looking for. > > The baseline tests are just making sure that the system comes up to a > shell. The driver loaded tests are checking that particular devices > have a driver bound to them. For one specific example: I'm looking at rockchip-i2s1-probed, which fails here: https://storage.kernelci.org/chrome-platform/for-kernelci/v6.1-rc1-5-g27b86a65cd16/arm64/defconfig+arm64-chromebook/gcc-10/lab-collabora/baseline-rk3399-gru-kevin.html I can't find a single mention of "i2s1" or "probed" in the kernelci repo, so I must be missing something. Is there some external config file in another repo? Or else the test configs are autogenerating cases on the fly based on parsing...the device tree? Anyway, I don't know how or why that ever passed, because AFAICT, RK3399 Chromebooks should only have a single I2S block enabled, and they're passing the 'rockchip-i2s0-probed' case. So it feels like I need to be disabling some test case. Somewhat similar story for cros-ec-sensors-accel{0,1}-probed, although I believe the sensor driver is still working for me; I also see no cros-ec-sensors errors in the KernelCI logs. So I wonder what exactly the test is looking for (e.g., maybe the device name changed?). Brian