Re: [PATCH 3.18 00/33] 3.18.56-stable review

[Kevin Hilman]

Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> On Mon, Jun 05, 2017 at 02:01:06PM -0700, kernelci.org bot wrote:
>> stable-rc/linux-3.18.y boot: 64 boots: 1 failed, 63 passed (v3.18.55-34-g975c7a9adc27)
>> 
>> Full Boot Summary: https://kernelci.org/boot/all/job/stable-rc/branch/linux-3.18.y/kernel/v3.18.55-34-g975c7a9adc27/
>> Full Build Summary: https://kernelci.org/build/stable-rc/branch/linux-3.18.y/kernel/v3.18.55-34-g975c7a9adc27/
>> 
>> Tree: stable-rc
>> Branch: linux-3.18.y
>> Git Describe: v3.18.55-34-g975c7a9adc27
>> Git Commit: 975c7a9adc2785c43f2d3fc77810678dde72be9e
>> Git URL: http://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git
>> Tested: 11 unique boards, 5 SoC families, 12 builds out of 204
>> 
>> Boot Failure Detected:
>> 
>> arm:
>> 
>>     at91_dt_defconfig
>>         at91sam9261ek: 1 failed lab
>
> I'm guessing this is ok?

Yes, it's OK.  After discussions with at91 maintainers, this platform
was known broken in v3.18, so we need to blacklist.

> Anyway, thanks for testing all of these, but the number of boots seems
> really low, is that expected at the moment?

It's really low because my lab, which has the most boards, has been
offline due to some equipment failure, and it's taking me some time to
get things back online due to lack of time.

Some results for mainline should start trickling in today, and then I'll
see about enabling stable trees.

Kevin