Re: renesas/master bisection: igt-kms-rockchip.kms_vblank.pipe-A-wait-forked on rk3399-gru-kevin

From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: Guillaume Tucker <guillaume.tucker@collabora.com>
Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
	Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org>,
	Sean Paul <seanpaul@chromium.org>,
	Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>,
	dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	Andrzej Hajda <andrzej.hajda@intel.com>,
	Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@linaro.org>,
	Robert Foss <robert.foss@linaro.org>,
	Laurent Pinchart <Laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>,
	Jonas Karlman <jonas@kwiboo.se>,
	Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@gmail.com>,
	kernelci@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: renesas/master bisection: igt-kms-rockchip.kms_vblank.pipe-A-wait-forked on rk3399-gru-kevin
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2022 14:54:02 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y5njirPlB8cGD7QT@sirena.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5cd34471-08cd-b4b8-c814-dc120417f602@collabora.com>

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1751 bytes --]

On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 03:27:56PM +0100, Guillaume Tucker wrote:
> On 14/12/2022 14:50, Mark Brown wrote:

> > As a developer I tend to find this unhelpful, it makes it much more
> > likely that the mail will get missed.  As a reporter it means there's
> > more information to copy into the report.

> Well it's up to you or anyone reporting the bisection result.
> Base on my personal experience, I always got very quick replies
> when doing this.

For me on the recipient side it's more a question of if you get any at
all.

> I don't see your point about copying more information though, I
> would just open the mbox in my mail client to reply and paste the
> content of the bisection report.  With a bit more work this could
> be fully automated but that should be part of the bisection
> rework using the new API & pipeline so sometime later in 2023...

If I'm manually pasing stuff I either have to quote it by hand or feel
like I need to edit the automatically generated bits.

> > I do notice that the Renesas tree tends to get a *lot* of the bisection
> > reports generated for some reason (vastly more than any other tree
> > including mainline or -next), however this wasn't sent based on the tree
> > at all - I just looked at the people involved with the commit.

> In the past month, there were 15 bisection reports on renesas, 7
> on linux-next and 28 on mainline for a total of 79 so 29 in other
> trees.  So it's true renesas is getting quite a lot of them, it's
> not entirely clear to me why that's the case but it's worth
> investigating a bit.

Yeah, that's vastly more than I'd expect and the overwhelming majority
of them are quite clearly not specific to the Renesas tree (things like
bootrr failures for non-Renesas boards).

[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 176 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel