On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 12:12:10PM +0100, Milosz Wasilewski wrote:
On 16 October 2017 at 23:41, Tom Gall tom.gall@linaro.org wrote:
Hi All,
I’m looking at the 4.14-rc5 results. I think it’s important that we establish clear green baselines so we can detect regressions.
Universally I think we want to get stuff on skip lists and then get after those skip lists working on fixes. As that happens, we basically get those fixes back ported to 4.9 and 4.4.
I haven’t captured everything since this requires manual c/n/p: (Being able to do command line queries would be really awesome)
With the triage meeting tomorrow I’d like to focus down in these areas.
x86_64 ltp-syscalls-tests - How much of this caused by NFS? Why are we still using NFS? linkat01 open12 openat02 renameat201 renameat202 sendfile09 sendfile09_64 utime01 utime02 utime06 utimes01
I think all are due to NFS. We're waiting for quotes for new HW. With old HW there is no other option than NFS.
Really? You can't run off of a sdcard? some other networked filessytem that actually works? cifs? nfsv4? lustre? :)
kselftest breakpoint_test_arm64 ftracetest pstore_tests run_fuse_test.sh run.sh run_vmtests seccomp_bpf test_align test_kmod.sh test_maps test_progs test_verifier
bpf is going to be blacklisted today unless someone objects: https://review.linaro.org/#/c/21838/
Why would it be failing on 4.14-rc?
And don't blacklist the whole thing on older kernels please, if at all possible just don't run the ones that we "know" will fail as the feature is not present.
thanks,
greg k-h