Hi Boris,
On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:34 AM, Boris Brezillon
<boris.brezil...@bootlin.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 14 May 2018 10:29:04 +0200
> Geert Uytterhoeven <ge...@linux-m68k.org> wrote:
>> On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:12 AM, Boris Brezillon
>> <boris.brezil...@bootlin.com> wrote:
>> > On Mon, 14 May 2018 10:00:30 +0200
>> > Geert Uytterhoeven <ge...@linux-m68k.org> wrote:
>> >> On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 10:00 PM, Sasha Levin
>> >> <alexander.le...@microsoft.com> 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 <l...@intel.com>
> To: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezil...@bootlin.com>
> 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?
BTW, my last report had:
configs tested: 178
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- ge...@linux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
