From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Guillaume Tucker Subject: Re: next/master boot: 273 boots: 63 failed, 209 passed with 1 untried/unknown (next-20171106) Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2017 16:42:48 +0000 Message-ID: References: <5a0055f1.85a8500a.98d54.a4e4@mx.google.com> <20171106191713.d7jqg2b6zqchythw@sirena.co.uk> <20171107105501.7x74gdqzhr7uulp2@sirena.org.uk> <613bcd63-a215-acbe-9150-c1495f7604f6@collabora.com> <5740b853-4898-2ebc-f67d-0808d1b44c36@nvidia.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <5740b853-4898-2ebc-f67d-0808d1b44c36-DDmLM1+adcrQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-tegra-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Jon Hunter , Mark Brown Cc: linux-tegra-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, "kernelci.org bot" , kernel-build-reports-cunTk1MwBs8s++Sfvej+rw@public.gmane.org, Robin Murphy List-Id: linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org On 08/11/17 15:57, Jon Hunter wrote: > > On 08/11/17 15:19, Guillaume Tucker wrote: > > ... > >> After a few more automated bisection attempts and a bug fix in >> LAVA, I've now found at least one potentially breaking commit: >> >> commit d89e2378a97fafdc74cbf997e7c88af75b81610a >> Author: Robin Murphy >> Date: Thu Oct 12 16:56:14 2017 +0100 >> >> drivers: flag buses which demand DMA configuration >> >> >> I've run some boot tests manually with this revision and then >> also after reverting it in-place, these respectively failed and >> passed: >> >> * d89e2378, failed: >> https://lava.collabora.co.uk/scheduler/job/978968 >> >> * d89e2378 reverted, passed: >> https://lava.collabora.co.uk/scheduler/job/978969 >> >> >> I then went on and tried the same but on top of next-20171108 and >> found that they both failed >> >> * next-20171108, failed: >> https://lava.collabora.co.uk/scheduler/job/979063 >> >> * next-20171108 with d89e2378 reverted, failed as well: >> https://lava.collabora.co.uk/scheduler/job/979167 >> >> >> So this shows there is almost certainly another offending commit >> in -next. The errors in both cases are not quite the same, the >> last one is triggered by a BUG whereas the first one is a NULL >> pointer (I haven't looked any further). Also I don't think >> there's any fix for d89e2378a97fafdc74cbf997e7c88af75b81610a >> which is currently still in next. > > This crash is a known issue [0] and we have been discussing this. Can > you try applying [1]? So with next-20171108 + d89e2378a9 reverted + [1] applied: https://lava.collabora.co.uk/scheduler/job/979173 No visible kernel crash in the log but it hangs. I also tried next-20171108 + [1] applied only: https://lava.collabora.co.uk/scheduler/job/979179 which also appears to hang. Guillaume > [0] https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/9/19/306 > [1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9974835/