Summary ------------------------------------------------------------------------
kernel: 4.4.92 git repo: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git git branch: linux-4.4.y git commit: 69f53f5d37d53ba17ca744947226b4cdadb90c13 git describe: v4.4.92 Test details: https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-stable-rc-4.4-oe/build/v4.4.92
Regressions (compared to build v4.4.91-48-gc0489dd5896d) ------------------------------------------------------------------------
x15 - arm: ltp-syscalls-tests: * fcntl36
* test src: git://github.com/linux-test-project/ltp.git
Boards, architectures and test suites: -------------------------------------
juno-r2 - arm64 * boot - pass: 20 * kselftest - skip: 1, fail: 21, pass: 32 * libhugetlbfs - skip: 1, pass: 90 * ltp-cap_bounds-tests - pass: 2 * ltp-containers-tests - skip: 36, fail: 18, pass: 27 * ltp-fcntl-locktests-tests - pass: 2 * ltp-filecaps-tests - pass: 2 * ltp-fs-tests - skip: 1, fail: 2, pass: 59 * ltp-fs_bind-tests - pass: 2 * ltp-fs_perms_simple-tests - pass: 19 * ltp-fsx-tests - pass: 2 * ltp-hugetlb-tests - pass: 22 * 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 - pass: 14 * ltp-securebits-tests - pass: 4 * ltp-timers-tests - pass: 13
x15 - arm * boot - pass: 20 * kselftest - skip: 1, fail: 20, pass: 32 * libhugetlbfs - skip: 1, * ltp-cap_bounds-tests - pass: 2 * ltp-containers-tests - fail: 18, pass: 63 * ltp-fcntl-locktests-tests - pass: 2 * ltp-filecaps-tests - pass: 2 * ltp-fs-tests - skip: 1, fail: 2, pass: 59 * ltp-fs_bind-tests - pass: 2 * ltp-fs_perms_simple-tests - pass: 19 * ltp-fsx-tests - pass: 2 * ltp-hugetlb-tests - fail: 22, * 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: 69, fail: 5, pass: 1036
dell-poweredge-r200 - x86_64 * boot - pass: 20 * kselftest - fail: 24, pass: 42 * libhugetlbfs - skip: 1, pass: 76 * ltp-cap_bounds-tests - pass: 2 * ltp-containers-tests - fail: 18, pass: 63 * ltp-fcntl-locktests-tests - pass: 2 * ltp-filecaps-tests - pass: 2 * ltp-fs-tests - skip: 1, pass: 61 * ltp-fs_bind-tests - pass: 2 * ltp-fs_perms_simple-tests - pass: 19 * ltp-fsx-tests - pass: 2 * ltp-hugetlb-tests - pass: 22 * 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: 164, fail: 13, pass: 960 * ltp-timers-tests - pass: 13
Documentation - https://collaborate.linaro.org/display/LKFT/Email+Reports
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 09:48:30AM +0000, Linaro QA wrote:
Summary
kernel: 4.4.92 git repo: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git git branch: linux-4.4.y git commit: 69f53f5d37d53ba17ca744947226b4cdadb90c13 git describe: v4.4.92 Test details: https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-stable-rc-4.4-oe/build/v4.4.92
Regressions (compared to build v4.4.91-48-gc0489dd5896d)
x15 - arm: ltp-syscalls-tests: * fcntl36
* test src: git://github.com/linux-test-project/ltp.git
Hm, what does this mean? Did this regress due to a breakage of your system, as this link: https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-stable-rc-4.4-oe/build/v4.4.92/test... shows all "No log available for this test" :(
confused.
greg k-h
On 16 October 2017 at 11:11, Greg KH gregkh@google.com wrote:
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 09:48:30AM +0000, Linaro QA wrote:
Summary
kernel: 4.4.92 git repo: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git git branch: linux-4.4.y git commit: 69f53f5d37d53ba17ca744947226b4cdadb90c13 git describe: v4.4.92 Test details: https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-stable-rc-4.4-oe/build/v4.4.92
Regressions (compared to build v4.4.91-48-gc0489dd5896d)
x15 - arm: ltp-syscalls-tests: * fcntl36
* test src: git://github.com/linux-test-project/ltp.gitHm, what does this mean? Did this regress due to a breakage of your system, as this link: https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-stable-rc-4.4-oe/build/v4.4.92/test... shows all "No log available for this test" :(
No, the test failed so the regression was reported. The logs are missing as the presentation is still work in progress. The page redesign was the first step. There is a full log for the whole test job but it's not split into the offending tests yet. Hopefully that will be done in a few weeks.
I didn't look into the details of failed test yet and asked Naresh to follow up on that.
milosz
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 12:11:48PM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 09:48:30AM +0000, Linaro QA wrote:
Summary
kernel: 4.4.92 git repo: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git git branch: linux-4.4.y git commit: 69f53f5d37d53ba17ca744947226b4cdadb90c13 git describe: v4.4.92 Test details: https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-stable-rc-4.4-oe/build/v4.4.92
Regressions (compared to build v4.4.91-48-gc0489dd5896d)
x15 - arm: ltp-syscalls-tests: * fcntl36
* test src: git://github.com/linux-test-project/ltp.gitHm, what does this mean? Did this regress due to a breakage of your system, as this link: https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-stable-rc-4.4-oe/build/v4.4.92/test... shows all "No log available for this test" :(
Obtaining the log snippets specific to each test is work in progress. You can scroll up a little bit to download the full log file for that test run
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 10:45:23AM -0200, Antonio Terceiro wrote:
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 12:11:48PM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 09:48:30AM +0000, Linaro QA wrote:
Summary
kernel: 4.4.92 git repo: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git git branch: linux-4.4.y git commit: 69f53f5d37d53ba17ca744947226b4cdadb90c13 git describe: v4.4.92 Test details: https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-stable-rc-4.4-oe/build/v4.4.92
Regressions (compared to build v4.4.91-48-gc0489dd5896d)
x15 - arm: ltp-syscalls-tests: * fcntl36
* test src: git://github.com/linux-test-project/ltp.gitHm, what does this mean? Did this regress due to a breakage of your system, as this link: https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-stable-rc-4.4-oe/build/v4.4.92/test... shows all "No log available for this test" :(
Obtaining the log snippets specific to each test is work in progress. You can scroll up a little bit to download the full log file for that test run
Ok, that's a bit better, thanks. At least I can search there...
greg k-h
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 12:11 PM, Greg KH gregkh@google.com wrote:
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 09:48:30AM +0000, Linaro QA wrote:
Summary
kernel: 4.4.92 git repo: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git git branch: linux-4.4.y git commit: 69f53f5d37d53ba17ca744947226b4cdadb90c13 git describe: v4.4.92 Test details: https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-stable-rc-4.4-oe/build/v4.4.92
Regressions (compared to build v4.4.91-48-gc0489dd5896d)
x15 - arm: ltp-syscalls-tests: * fcntl36
* test src: git://github.com/linux-test-project/ltp.gitHm, what does this mean? Did this regress due to a breakage of your system, as this link: https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-stable-rc-4.4-oe/build/v4.4.92/test... shows all "No log available for this test" :(
confused.
There are three issues here:
1. you looked at the wrong link. The board that produced the failure was 'x15' (32-bit ARM), while the test-run you linked to is for 64-bit x86, and fcntl36 did not actually fail there. This is obviously confusing, since we run the same test suite once for each board, and the results are in different places.
2. The "No log available for this test" output here means that the feature to split up the log per test case has not yet been implemented yet. The log is indeed available, you just need to manually look through a large file from the "Log file" link. I also had this problem when I looked at a different regression last week and couldn't find it.
The full log with the LTP output in this case is available for download at https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-stable-rc-4.4-oe/build/v4.4.92/test...
3. The actual failure is here:
tst_test.c:934: INFO: Timeout per run is 0h 15m 00s fcntl36.c:303: INFO: OFD read lock vs OFD write lock fcntl36.c:381: PASS: Access between threads synchronized fcntl36.c:303: INFO: OFD write lock vs POSIX write lock fcntl36.c:381: PASS: Access between threads synchronized fcntl36.c:303: INFO: OFD read lock vs POSIX write lock fcntl36.c:205: FAIL: Unexpected data offset 12304 value 9 fcntl36.c:205: FAIL: Unexpected data offset 13568 value 47 fcntl36.c:303: INFO: OFD write lock vs POSIX read lock fcntl36.c:381: PASS: Access between threads synchronized fcntl36.c:303: INFO: OFD write lock vs OFD write lock fcntl36.c:381: PASS: Access between threads synchronized fcntl36.c:303: INFO: OFD r/w lock vs POSIX write lock fcntl36.c:381: PASS: Access between threads synchronized fcntl36.c:303: INFO: OFD r/w lock vs POSIX read lock fcntl36.c:381: PASS: Access between threads synchronized Summary: passed 6 failed 2 skipped 0 warnings 0
I haven't looked at the detailed failure, but the source for that test is available at https://github.com/linux-test-project/ltp/blob/master/testcases/kernel/sysca...
Arnd
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 02:50:22PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 12:11 PM, Greg KH gregkh@google.com wrote:
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 09:48:30AM +0000, Linaro QA wrote:
Summary
kernel: 4.4.92 git repo: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git git branch: linux-4.4.y git commit: 69f53f5d37d53ba17ca744947226b4cdadb90c13 git describe: v4.4.92 Test details: https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-stable-rc-4.4-oe/build/v4.4.92
Regressions (compared to build v4.4.91-48-gc0489dd5896d)
x15 - arm: ltp-syscalls-tests: * fcntl36
* test src: git://github.com/linux-test-project/ltp.gitHm, what does this mean? Did this regress due to a breakage of your system, as this link: https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-stable-rc-4.4-oe/build/v4.4.92/test... shows all "No log available for this test" :(
confused.
There are three issues here:
- you looked at the wrong link. The board that produced the failure
was 'x15' (32-bit ARM), while the test-run you linked to is for 64-bit x86, and fcntl36 did not actually fail there. This is obviously confusing, since we run the same test suite once for each board, and the results are in different places.
Huh? There was only one link here, where else should I be looking other than the provided link in the email, and then scrolling down to click on the red "fail" button for the test itself?
What did I miss on the page that I should have looked at instead?
thanks,
greg k-h
On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 1:13 PM, Greg KH gregkh@google.com wrote:
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 02:50:22PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 12:11 PM, Greg KH gregkh@google.com wrote:
There are three issues here:
- you looked at the wrong link. The board that produced the failure
was 'x15' (32-bit ARM), while the test-run you linked to is for 64-bit x86, and fcntl36 did not actually fail there. This is obviously confusing, since we run the same test suite once for each board, and the results are in different places.
Huh? There was only one link here, where else should I be looking other than the provided link in the email, and then scrolling down to click on the red "fail" button for the test itself?
What did I miss on the page that I should have looked at instead?
The link you clicked was presumably this one
https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-stable-rc-4.4-oe/build/v4.4.92
From there, you can see all the results grouped by test suite
(boot, kselftest, ltp-containers-tests, ltp-syscalls-test, ...) and by target machine (juno-r2, x15, dell-poweredge-r200, possibly hikey and others as well depending on kernel release).
However, you get all the combinations, so in this report there are three test runs for ltp-syscalls-test, one for each board we had a booting kernel for. Each of the ltp-syscalls-test runs had some succeeding and some known-failing test cases inside it, but only the x15 one was flagged as a regression in the output
x15 - arm: ltp-syscalls-tests: * fcntl36
Arnd
On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 01:22:27PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 1:13 PM, Greg KH gregkh@google.com wrote:
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 02:50:22PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 12:11 PM, Greg KH gregkh@google.com wrote:
There are three issues here:
- you looked at the wrong link. The board that produced the failure
was 'x15' (32-bit ARM), while the test-run you linked to is for 64-bit x86, and fcntl36 did not actually fail there. This is obviously confusing, since we run the same test suite once for each board, and the results are in different places.
Huh? There was only one link here, where else should I be looking other than the provided link in the email, and then scrolling down to click on the red "fail" button for the test itself?
What did I miss on the page that I should have looked at instead?
The link you clicked was presumably this one
https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-stable-rc-4.4-oe/build/v4.4.92
From there, you can see all the results grouped by test suite (boot, kselftest, ltp-containers-tests, ltp-syscalls-test, ...) and by target machine (juno-r2, x15, dell-poweredge-r200, possibly hikey and others as well depending on kernel release).
However, you get all the combinations, so in this report there are three test runs for ltp-syscalls-test, one for each board we had a booting kernel for. Each of the ltp-syscalls-test runs had some succeeding and some known-failing test cases inside it, but only the x15 one was flagged as a regression in the output
Ah, ugh, that's a mess, yeah, having different servers does not make that simple... I'll try to be more careful next time, but I did click on the failed-test button, so it might have been the wrong arch/server, but it was still a failure :)
thanks,
greg k-h
kernel-build-reports@lists.linaro.org
-
Antonio Terceiro -
Arnd Bergmann -
Greg KH -
Linaro QA -
Milosz Wasilewski