On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 03:47:25PM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote:
Greg Kroah-Hartman gregkh@linuxfoundation.org writes:
On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 07:47:45AM -0700, kernelci.org bot wrote:
stable-rc/linux-4.4.y boot: 98 boots: 1 failed, 92 passed with 3 offline, 1 untried/unknown, 1 conflict (v4.4.179-267-gbe756dada5b7)
Full Boot Summary: https://kernelci.org/boot/all/job/stable-rc/branch/linux-4.4.y/kernel/v4.4.1... Full Build Summary: https://kernelci.org/build/stable-rc/branch/linux-4.4.y/kernel/v4.4.179-267-...
Tree: stable-rc Branch: linux-4.4.y Git Describe: v4.4.179-267-gbe756dada5b7 Git Commit: be756dada5b771fe51be37a77ad0bdfba543fdae Git URL: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git Tested: 44 unique boards, 21 SoC families, 14 builds out of 190
Boot Regressions Detected:
arm:
omap2plus_defconfig: gcc-8: omap4-panda: lab-baylibre: new failure (last pass: v4.4.179-254-gce69be0d452a)Odd, is this specific to this release?
No, looks like a lab-specific hiccup.
A little bit further down in the original report (I know, not a useful place for it) was this:
Conflicting Boot Failure Detected: (These likely are not failures as other labs are reporting PASS. Needs review.) arm: omap2plus_defconfig: omap4-panda: lab-baylibre: FAIL (gcc-8) lab-baylibre-seattle: PASS (gcc-8)
which means the same board passed in one lab, but not the other, suggesting something.
This is a bug in our email reports. Regressions should not be reported whene there are conflicting results from labs.
Ah, thanks for the explaination, that makes more sense.
greg k-h