Re: [PATCH 5.10 00/11] 5.10.123-rc1 review

Jon Hunter
2022-06-16T13:17:28Z

Hi Jason,

On 16/06/2022 14:11, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> Hi Jon,
>
> On Thu, Jun 16, 2022 at 09:48:37AM +0100, Jon Hunter wrote:
>> No new regressions for Tegra. I am seeing the following kernel warning
>> that is causing a boot test to fail, but this has been happening for a
>> few releases now (I would have reported it earlier but we have been
>> having some infrastructure issues) ...
>>
>> WARNING KERN urandom_read_iter: 82 callbacks suppressed
>>
>> This appears to be introduced by commit "random: convert to using
>> fops->read_iter()" [0]. Interestingly, I am not seeing this in the
>> mainline as far as I can tell and so I am not sure if there is something
>> else that is missing?
>>
>>
>> Test results for stable-v5.10:
>> 10 builds: 10 pass, 0 fail
>> 28 boots: 28 pass, 0 fail
>> 75 tests: 74 pass, 1 fail
>>
>> Linux version: 5.10.123-rc1-gf67ea0f67087
>> Boards tested: tegra124-jetson-tk1, tegra186-p2771-0000,
>> tegra194-p2972-0000, tegra194-p3509-0000+p3668-0000,
>> tegra20-ventana, tegra210-p2371-2180,
>> tegra210-p3450-0000, tegra30-cardhu-a04
>>
>> Test failures: tegra194-p2972-0000: boot.py
>>
>> Tested-by: Jon Hunter <jonathanh@nvidia.com>
>>
>> Jon
>>
>> [0]
>> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220527084907.568432116@linuxfoundation.org/
>
> Please CC me on RNG issues.

Yes no problem.

> I'm surprised that this message results in a failure. It's not a
> WARN_ON() or a BUG() that's being triggered here. This is just the
> simple `pr_warn("%s: %d callbacks suppressed\n")` in lib/ratelimit.c,
> which really shouldn't be causing your CI to fail. Sounds like your
> harness could use some adjusting.

It is not a hard failure, but any new warning will be flagged and cause
this particular test to fail. So all I could see is that a new warning
was occurring and wanted to understand what was going on. We can ignore
the warning if necessary.

> Nonetheless, you have found a 4 year old bug in the urandom warning
> accounting that was recently made more easily triggerable by a newer
> commit, though not the one you mentioned. I'll fix this up and keep you
> CC'd on the patch, which should make it into stable as well.

OK, great! Happy to test anything on my end.

Cheers
Jon

--
nvpublic