From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CF0F12575 for ; Mon, 14 May 2018 08:50:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.bootlin.com (mail.bootlin.com [62.4.15.54]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 097981B4 for ; Mon, 14 May 2018 08:50:58 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 10:48:03 +0200 From: Boris Brezillon To: Geert Uytterhoeven Message-ID: <20180514104803.23d2a8a3@bbrezillon> In-Reply-To: References: <20180502194632.GB18390@sasha-vm> <20180503020550.GP2714@sirena.org.uk> <20180503031000.GC29205@thunk.org> <0276fcda-0385-8f22-dbdb-e063f7ed8bbe@roeck-us.net> <20180503224217.GR2714@sirena.org.uk> <20180503230905.GA98604@atomide.com> <20180509084440.GW13402@sirena.org.uk> <20180510164722.GH8514@sasha-vm> <20180514101237.5df1e0d7@bbrezillon> <20180514103428.55285a70@bbrezillon> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org" , Greg KH , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "w@1wt.eu" Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] bug-introducing patches List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , +Fengguang On Mon, 14 May 2018 10:40:10 +0200 Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Hi Boris, > > On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:34 AM, Boris Brezillon > wrote: > > On Mon, 14 May 2018 10:29:04 +0200 > > Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > >> On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:12 AM, Boris Brezillon > >> wrote: > >> > On Mon, 14 May 2018 10:00:30 +0200 > >> > Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > >> >> On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 10:00 PM, Sasha Levin > >> >> wrote: > >> >> > On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 03:44:50PM -0400, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: > >> >> >>On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 04:38:21PM +0000, Sasha Levin wrote: > >> >> > What's worse is that that commit is tagged for stable, which means > >> >> > that (given Greg's schedule) it may find it's way to -stable users > >> >> > even before some -next users/bots had a chance to test it out. > >> >> > >> >> I just noticed a case where a commit was picked up for stable, while a > >> >> bot had flagged it as a build regression 18 hours earlier (with a CC to > >> >> lkml). > >> > > >> > Also, this patch has been on a tree that I know is tested by Fengguang's > >> > robots for more than a week (and in linux-next for 2 days, which, I > >> > agree, is probably not enough), and still, I only received the bug > >> > report when the patch reached mainline. Are there tests that are only > >> > run on Linus' tree? > >> > >> Have your received a success report from Fengguang's bot, listing all > >> configs tested (the broken one should be included; it is included in the > >> configs tested on my branches)? > > > > Yes I did (see below). > > > > -->8-- > > From: kbuild test robot > > To: Boris Brezillon > > Subject: [bbrezillon-0day:mtd/fixes] BUILD SUCCESS fc3a9e15b492eef707afd56b7478001fdecfe53f > > Date: Mon, 07 May 2018 20:05:52 +0800 > > User-Agent: Heirloom mailx 12.5 6/20/10 > > > > tree/branch: https://github.com/bbrezillon/linux-0day mtd/fixes > > branch HEAD: fc3a9e15b492eef707afd56b7478001fdecfe53f mtd: rawnand: Make sure we wait tWB before polling the STATUS reg > > > > elapsed time: 49m > > > > configs tested: 142 > > But the failed config (m68k/allmodconfig) is not listed? Yes, that's my point. It seems that some configs are only rarely (never?) tested on my linux-0day tree (probably because they take longer to build), and I should only take kbuild robot results as an indication not a guarantee.