Re: [PATCH 3.18 00/19] 3.18.76-stable review

[Guillaume Tucker]

On 19/10/17 13:21, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 04:20:30PM -0700, kernelci.org bot wrote:
> > > stable-rc/linux-3.18.y boot: 39 boots: 3 failed, 36 passed (v3.18.75-20-g4ffe55402429)
> > >
> > > Full Boot Summary: https://kernelci.org/boot/all/job/stable-rc/branch/linux-3.18.y/kernel/v3.18.75-20-g4ffe55402429/
> > > Full Build Summary: https://kernelci.org/build/stable-rc/branch/linux-3.18.y/kernel/v3.18.75-20-g4ffe55402429/
> > >
> > > Tree: stable-rc
> > > Branch: linux-3.18.y
> > > Git Describe: v3.18.75-20-g4ffe55402429
> > > Git Commit: 4ffe55402429b1be08b48d02b7be9371148c68b6
> > > Git URL: http://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git
> > > Tested: 12 unique boards, 6 SoC families, 10 builds out of 182
> > >
> > > Boot Failures Detected:
> > >
> > > arm:
> > >
> > >     omap2plus_defconfig
> > >         am335x-boneblack: 1 failed lab
> > >
> > >     exynos_defconfig
> > >         exynos5800-peach-pi: 1 failed lab
> > >
> > >     multi_v7_defconfig
> > >         imx6q-sabrelite: 1 failed lab
> >
> > Thanks for all of the reports.  They all look good except this for 3.18.
> > Is this to be expected?
>
> TL;DR; all 3 are lab infrastructure issues, nothing related to the kernel.
>
> Cc'd Guillaume from Collabora to have a look.
>
> @Guillaume: 2 of the 3 boards failed to get a DHCP address from u-boot.
> The 3rd one failed to power cycle.

These were lab issues indeed, I've resubmitted the 3 failing jobs
and they all passed.  It looks like there was a glitch in the lab
network, we'll investigate and try to prevent this from occurring
again.

Also it would be nice if infrastructure failures could be
detected, clearly if the "power on" command returns an error or
if the bootloader fails to get an IP address we know it's not
because of a kernel problem.  Something to discuss or add to the
backlog I guess.

Guillaume