On 27 February 2015 at 00:48, Arnd Bergmann arnd@arndb.de wrote:

On Thursday 26 February 2015 19:26:11 kernelci. org bot wrote:

...

mainline boot: 247 boots: 243 passed, 4 failed (v4.0-rc1-36-g4f671fe2f952)

Full Boot Summary: http://kernelci.org/boot/all/job/mainline/kernel/v4.0-rc1-36-g4f671fe2f952/ Full Build Summary: http://kernelci.org/build/mainline/kernel/v4.0-rc1-36-g4f671fe2f952/

Tree: mainline Branch: local/master Git Describe: v4.0-rc1-36-g4f671fe2f952 Git Commit: 4f671fe2f9523a1ea206f63fe60a7c7b3a56d5c7 Git URL: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git Tested: 67 unique boards, 22 SoC families, 25 builds out of 125

Boot Failures Detected: http://kernelci.org/boot/?v4.0-rc1-36-g4f671fe2f952&fail

arm:

exynos_defconfig:
    exynos5250-arndale:
        lab-tbaker: FAIL
        lab-khilman: FAIL
    exynos5800-peach-pi:
        lab-khilman: FAIL

I can't find the link to the boot logs here.

http://kernelci.org/boot/exynos5250-arndale/job/mainline/kernel/v4.0-rc1-36-... contains broken links for me.

Not sure why this is has happened yet. I'll dig through the upload logs in the morning, thanks for reporting this.

In the interim the log can be found here:

exynos5250-arndale: lab-tbaker: FAIL http://lava/scheduler/job/44588/log_file#L_59_118

    Arnd

---

Kernel-build-reports mailing list Kernel-build-reports@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-build-reports

Cheers,

Arnd Bergmann arnd@arndb.de writes:

On Thursday 26 February 2015 19:26:11 kernelci. org bot wrote:

...

mainline boot: 247 boots: 243 passed, 4 failed (v4.0-rc1-36-g4f671fe2f952)

Full Boot Summary: http://kernelci.org/boot/all/job/mainline/kernel/v4.0-rc1-36-g4f671fe2f952/ Full Build Summary: http://kernelci.org/build/mainline/kernel/v4.0-rc1-36-g4f671fe2f952/

Tree: mainline Branch: local/master Git Describe: v4.0-rc1-36-g4f671fe2f952 Git Commit: 4f671fe2f9523a1ea206f63fe60a7c7b3a56d5c7 Git URL: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git Tested: 67 unique boards, 22 SoC families, 25 builds out of 125

Boot Failures Detected: http://kernelci.org/boot/?v4.0-rc1-36-g4f671fe2f952&fail

arm:

exynos_defconfig:
    exynos5250-arndale:
        lab-tbaker: FAIL
        lab-khilman: FAIL
    exynos5800-peach-pi:
        lab-khilman: FAIL

I can't find the link to the boot logs here.

http://kernelci.org/boot/exynos5250-arndale/job/mainline/kernel/v4.0-rc1-36-... contains broken links for me.

In case it helps, the boot log for the same board in my farm (also failing) is here: http://storage.kernelci.org/mainline/v4.0-rc1-36-g4f671fe2f952/arm-exynos_de...

FWIW, this exynos iommu/drm issue has been resolved in linux-next, but I'm not sure yet if it's been also submitted as a fix for v4.0-rc.

Kevin

Arnd Bergmann arnd@arndb.de writes:

[...]

On a semi-related topic, I wonder if the email output can be made a little more verbose by including the failure reason ("kernel: ERROR: failed to boot: Kernel panic") that is already present on the website.

That's a good idea. We'll look into that.

I would also find a deep link into the boot log useful here, but that may be adding too much information, as I understand the desire to not put too much text into these email.

We've gone back and forth on this. The URLs tend to be rather long, so cause clutter, so we're looking at URL shorteners.

On the other hand, we're considering sending multipart emails. The text/html part would remain clean/sparse, but the text/html part could include links. This is what we're exploring now.

I'm curious though, I know some folks really don't like HTML mail, but is multipart acceptable as long as there's a text/plain part?

Kevin

On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 01:33:34PM -0800, Kevin Hilman wrote:

We've gone back and forth on this. The URLs tend to be rather long, so cause clutter, so we're looking at URL shorteners.

On the other hand, we're considering sending multipart emails. The text/html part would remain clean/sparse, but the text/html part could include links. This is what we're exploring now.

I'm curious though, I know some folks really don't like HTML mail, but is multipart acceptable as long as there's a text/plain part?

Provided the HTML is sanely formatted so it's parsable by the human eye trying to pick out the appropriate link when necessary.

Not everyone uses a mail reader which groks html.