On 9/15/20 11:52 AM, Justin Cook wrote:
Hello,
Linaro had previously been sending out a report based on our testing of the linux kernel using kselftest. We paused sending that report to fix a few issues. We are now continuing the process, starting with this report.
If you have any questions, comments, feedback, or concerns please email lkft@linaro.org mailto:lkft@linaro.org.
Thanks,
Justin
Hi Justin,
Thanks for the report. It would be nice to see the reports. However, it is hard for me to determine which tests failed and why.
On Tue, 15 Sep 2020 at 12:44, LKFT <lkft@linaro.org mailto:lkft@linaro.org> wrote:
## Kernel * kernel: 5.9.0-rc5 * git repo: ['https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git', 'https://gitlab.com/Linaro/lkft/mirrors/next/linux-next'] * git branch: master * git commit: 6b02addb1d1748d21dd1261e46029b264be4e5a0 * git describe: next-20200915 * Test details: https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-next-master/build/next-20200915 ## Regressions (compared to build next-20200914) juno-r2: kselftest: * memfd_memfd_test x86: kselftest-vsyscall-mode-native: * kvm_vmx_preemption_timer_test
I looked for the above two failures to start with since these are regressions and couldn't find them.
Are the regressions tied to new commits in linux-next from the mm and kvm trees?
thanks, -- Shuah
Shuah,
The report sent was meant to be a general summary, rather than a deep dive, of the results. Most of that information can be gathered by viewing the test details.
* Test details: https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-next-master/build/next-20200915
If you open that link in a web browser, there are a number of ways to dig down into the results. If you have questions about the best ways to do this, please let me know.
Maybe that isn't the best way? I'm very open to feedback. I just tried to best copy the previous report that was being sent out to start.
Please feel free to ask any questions you have or provide me with feedback. I'm here to help.
Thanks,
Justin
On Tue, 15 Sep 2020 at 15:18, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On 9/15/20 11:52 AM, Justin Cook wrote:
Hello,
Linaro had previously been sending out a report based on our testing of the linux kernel using kselftest. We paused sending that report to fix a few issues. We are now continuing the process, starting with this report.
If you have any questions, comments, feedback, or concerns please email lkft@linaro.org mailto:lkft@linaro.org.
Thanks,
Justin
Hi Justin,
Thanks for the report. It would be nice to see the reports. However, it is hard for me to determine which tests failed and why.
On Tue, 15 Sep 2020 at 12:44, LKFT <lkft@linaro.org mailto:lkft@linaro.org> wrote:
## Kernel * kernel: 5.9.0-rc5 * git repo: ['https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git', 'https://gitlab.com/Linaro/lkft/mirrors/next/linux-next'] * git branch: master * git commit: 6b02addb1d1748d21dd1261e46029b264be4e5a0 * git describe: next-20200915 * Test details: https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-next-master/build/next-20200915 ## Regressions (compared to build next-20200914) juno-r2: kselftest: * memfd_memfd_test x86: kselftest-vsyscall-mode-native: * kvm_vmx_preemption_timer_testI looked for the above two failures to start with since these are regressions and couldn't find them.
Are the regressions tied to new commits in linux-next from the mm and kvm trees?
thanks, -- Shuah
Hi Justin,
On 9/17/20 9:52 AM, Justin Cook wrote:
Shuah,
The report sent was meant to be a general summary, rather than a deep dive, of the results. Most of that information can be gathered by viewing the test details.
* Test details: https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-next-master/build/next-20200915If you open that link in a web browser, there are a number of ways to dig down into the results. If you have questions about the best ways to do this, please let me know.
Yes. I did look at the results. It isn't easy to figure out. It would help is cc'ing the test authors in addition to the list. There are two failed tests if recall correctly, mm and kvm. cc'ing and subsystem mailing lists and authors for the last commit for the test in question will get you results quickly.
Maybe that isn't the best way? I'm very open to feedback. I just tried to best copy the previous report that was being sent out to start.
We had the same problem with the previous report. It just tells you which tests regressed. It is a good start. Unfortunately without tagging test authors/maintainers it won't get addressed.
thanks, -- Shuah
linux-kselftest-mirror@lists.linaro.org
-
Justin Cook -
Shuah Khan