Summary ------------------------------------------------------------------------
kernel: 4.14.0 git repo: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git git branch: master git commit: 7c225c69f86c934e3be9be63ecde754e286838d7 git describe: v4.14-7379-g7c225c69f86c Test details: https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-mainline-oe/build/v4.14-7379-g7c225...
Regressions (compared to build v4.14-rc8) ------------------------------------------------------------------------
x15 - arm: ltp-syscalls-tests: * ioctl03
* test src: git://github.com/linux-test-project/ltp.git
Boards, architectures and test suites: -------------------------------------
x15 - arm * boot - pass: 20 * kselftest - skip: 17, pass: 36 * libhugetlbfs - skip: 1, pass: 87 * ltp-cap_bounds-tests - pass: 2 * ltp-containers-tests - pass: 64 * ltp-fcntl-locktests-tests - pass: 2 * ltp-filecaps-tests - pass: 2 * ltp-fs-tests - pass: 60 * ltp-fs_bind-tests - pass: 2 * ltp-fs_perms_simple-tests - pass: 19 * ltp-fsx-tests - pass: 2 * ltp-hugetlb-tests - skip: 2, pass: 20 * ltp-io-tests - pass: 3 * ltp-ipc-tests - pass: 9 * ltp-math-tests - pass: 11 * ltp-nptl-tests - pass: 2 * ltp-pty-tests - pass: 4 * ltp-sched-tests - skip: 1, pass: 13 * ltp-securebits-tests - pass: 4 * ltp-syscalls-tests - skip: 66, fail: 2, pass: 1036 * ltp-timers-tests - pass: 12
Documentation - https://collaborate.linaro.org/display/LKFT/Email+Reports
Hi Team,
On 16 November 2017 at 12:11, Linaro QA qa-reports@linaro.org wrote:
Summary
kernel: 4.14.0 git repo: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git git branch: master git commit: 7c225c69f86c934e3be9be63ecde754e286838d7 git describe: v4.14-7379-g7c225c69f86c Test details: https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-mainline-oe/build/v4.14-7379-g7c225...
Regressions (compared to build v4.14-rc8)
x15 - arm: ltp-syscalls-tests: * ioctl03
Bug reported for the investigation of failure.
LKFT: linux-mainline: Hikey and x15: LTP ioctl03: TFAIL: ioctl03.c:114: (UNKNOWN 0x30) https://bugs.linaro.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3470
- Naresh
* test src: git://github.com/linux-test-project/ltp.gitBoards, architectures and test suites:
x15 - arm
- boot - pass: 20
- kselftest - skip: 17, pass: 36
- libhugetlbfs - skip: 1, pass: 87
- ltp-cap_bounds-tests - pass: 2
- ltp-containers-tests - pass: 64
- ltp-fcntl-locktests-tests - pass: 2
- ltp-filecaps-tests - pass: 2
- ltp-fs-tests - pass: 60
- ltp-fs_bind-tests - pass: 2
- ltp-fs_perms_simple-tests - pass: 19
- ltp-fsx-tests - pass: 2
- ltp-hugetlb-tests - skip: 2, pass: 20
- ltp-io-tests - pass: 3
- ltp-ipc-tests - pass: 9
- ltp-math-tests - pass: 11
- ltp-nptl-tests - pass: 2
- ltp-pty-tests - pass: 4
- ltp-sched-tests - skip: 1, pass: 13
- ltp-securebits-tests - pass: 4
- ltp-syscalls-tests - skip: 66, fail: 2, pass: 1036
- ltp-timers-tests - pass: 12
Documentation - https://collaborate.linaro.org/display/LKFT/Email+Reports
-- Linaro QA (beta) https://qa-reports.linaro.org
On 16 November 2017 at 14:35, Naresh Kamboju naresh.kamboju@linaro.org wrote:
Hi Team,
On 16 November 2017 at 12:11, Linaro QA qa-reports@linaro.org wrote:
Summary
kernel: 4.14.0 git repo: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git git branch: master git commit: 7c225c69f86c934e3be9be63ecde754e286838d7 git describe: v4.14-7379-g7c225c69f86c Test details: https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-mainline-oe/build/v4.14-7379-g7c225...
Regressions (compared to build v4.14-rc8)
x15 - arm: ltp-syscalls-tests: * ioctl03
Bug reported for the investigation of failure.
LKFT: linux-mainline: Hikey and x15: LTP ioctl03: TFAIL: ioctl03.c:114: (UNKNOWN 0x30) https://bugs.linaro.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3470
[ Arnd Bergmann Wrote on 16 Nov 2017]
The test case needs to be updated to support the IFF_NAPI and IFF_NAPI_FRAGS flags that got added in these commits, both merged into mainline now:
943170998b20 ("tun: enable NAPI for TUN/TAP driver") 90e33d459407 ("tun: enable napi_gro_frags() for TUN/TAP driver") ----
From Arnd 's comments it confirms,
Latest kernel and old test cases. Test case needs to be updated. To get test cases updated, We may have to wait till next LTP release ? or cherry pick fixed test case from LTP. Till the test case fix lands in LTP repo we may have to skip this test case ?
- Naresh
- Naresh
* test src: git://github.com/linux-test-project/ltp.gitBoards, architectures and test suites:
x15 - arm
- boot - pass: 20
- kselftest - skip: 17, pass: 36
- libhugetlbfs - skip: 1, pass: 87
- ltp-cap_bounds-tests - pass: 2
- ltp-containers-tests - pass: 64
- ltp-fcntl-locktests-tests - pass: 2
- ltp-filecaps-tests - pass: 2
- ltp-fs-tests - pass: 60
- ltp-fs_bind-tests - pass: 2
- ltp-fs_perms_simple-tests - pass: 19
- ltp-fsx-tests - pass: 2
- ltp-hugetlb-tests - skip: 2, pass: 20
- ltp-io-tests - pass: 3
- ltp-ipc-tests - pass: 9
- ltp-math-tests - pass: 11
- ltp-nptl-tests - pass: 2
- ltp-pty-tests - pass: 4
- ltp-sched-tests - skip: 1, pass: 13
- ltp-securebits-tests - pass: 4
- ltp-syscalls-tests - skip: 66, fail: 2, pass: 1036
- ltp-timers-tests - pass: 12
Documentation - https://collaborate.linaro.org/display/LKFT/Email+Reports
-- Linaro QA (beta) https://qa-reports.linaro.org
On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 06:41:43AM +0000, Linaro QA wrote:
Summary
kernel: 4.14.0 git repo: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git git branch: master
So, for info what I see now in my mailbox with these mails is:
1313 N 11/16 Linaro QA (2.2K) 4.14.0/7c225c69: regressions detected i
compared to:
1320 N F 11/16 To kernel-build (4.1K) next-20171116 build: 0 failures 3 warni 1321 N 11/15 Olof's autobuil (1.7K) next build: 9 warnings 0 failures (next 1327 N 11/16 kernelci.org bo ( 56K) mainline/master boot: 237 boots: 51 fai
so it's hard to tell what tree is being looked at.
On 16 November 2017 at 11:00, Mark Brown broonie@kernel.org wrote:
On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 06:41:43AM +0000, Linaro QA wrote:
Summary
kernel: 4.14.0 git repo: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git git branch: master
So, for info what I see now in my mailbox with these mails is:
1313 N 11/16 Linaro QA (2.2K) 4.14.0/7c225c69: regressions detected i
compared to:
1320 N F 11/16 To kernel-build (4.1K) next-20171116 build: 0 failures 3 warni 1321 N 11/15 Olof's autobuil (1.7K) next build: 9 warnings 0 failures (next 1327 N 11/16 kernelci.org bo ( 56K) mainline/master boot: 237 boots: 51 fai
so it's hard to tell what tree is being looked at.
Do you mean the subject is ambiguous?
milosz
On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 11:47:46AM +0000, Milosz Wasilewski wrote:
On 16 November 2017 at 11:00, Mark Brown broonie@kernel.org wrote:
So, for info what I see now in my mailbox with these mails is:
1313 N 11/16 Linaro QA (2.2K) 4.14.0/7c225c69: regressions detected i
so it's hard to tell what tree is being looked at.
Do you mean the subject is ambiguous?
Yes, it's just got a version number in it but that's not terribly helpful in telling which tree it is, especially as more trees get added. This one is particularly misleading since it has a three component version number which looks like stable but it's actually for mainline.
From the first bit in the report:
Summary ------------------------------------------------------------------------
kernel: 4.14.0 git repo: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ - what tree
git branch: master git commit: 7c225c69f86c934e3be9be63ecde754e286838d7 git describe: v4.14-7379-g7c225c69f86c
"mainline' in the subject is kinda obvious isn't it?
On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 6:43 AM, Mark Brown broonie@kernel.org wrote:
On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 11:47:46AM +0000, Milosz Wasilewski wrote:
On 16 November 2017 at 11:00, Mark Brown broonie@kernel.org wrote:
So, for info what I see now in my mailbox with these mails is:
1313 N 11/16 Linaro QA (2.2K) 4.14.0/7c225c69: regressions detected i
so it's hard to tell what tree is being looked at.
Do you mean the subject is ambiguous?
Yes, it's just got a version number in it but that's not terribly helpful in telling which tree it is, especially as more trees get added. This one is particularly misleading since it has a three component version number which looks like stable but it's actually for mainline.
Kernel-build-reports mailing list Kernel-build-reports@lists.linaro.org https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-build-reports
On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 07:51:44AM -0600, Tom Gall wrote:
From the first bit in the report: Summary
kernel: 4.14.0 git repo: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ - what tree
Sure, I don't see that until I open the mail.
"mainline' in the subject is kinda obvious isn't it?
It's right at the end of the subject line and hence not visible in my mail client (which is why I pasted that in). It's going to be tough to fit it into an 80 column terminal display, and depending on the layout some GUI clients are going to have similar issues.
On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 6:43 AM, Mark Brown broonie@kernel.org wrote:
Please don't top post, reply in line with needed context. This allows readers to readily follow the flow of conversation and understand what you are talking about and also helps ensure that everything in the discussion is being addressed.
On 16 November 2017 at 14:53, Mark Brown broonie@kernel.org wrote:
On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 07:51:44AM -0600, Tom Gall wrote:
From the first bit in the report: Summary
kernel: 4.14.0 git repo: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ - what tree
Sure, I don't see that until I open the mail.
"mainline' in the subject is kinda obvious isn't it?
It's right at the end of the subject line and hence not visible in my mail client (which is why I pasted that in). It's going to be tough to fit it into an 80 column terminal display, and depending on the layout some GUI clients are going to have similar issues.
I think I figured out how to change the subject so it has the 'project short name' before the 80 chars mark. Should I just copy the names kernelci uses or come up with something else?
milosz
On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 04:32:01PM +0000, Milosz Wasilewski wrote:
I think I figured out how to change the subject so it has the 'project short name' before the 80 chars mark. Should I just copy the names kernelci uses or come up with something else?
I figure those are probably good enough as a starting point.
kernel-build-reports@lists.linaro.org
-
Linaro QA -
Mark Brown -
Milosz Wasilewski -
Naresh Kamboju -
Tom Gall