Hi,
Here's a tip for people who've been bothered by messages sent by kbuild bot like
below:
[auto build test ERROR on net/master]
[also build test ERROR on v4.8-rc3 next-20160825]
[if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note
to help improve the system]
It means that 0d
On 09/08, Fengguang Wu wrote:
>Hi Jens and Tejun,
>
>>The command line was in the original email:
>>
>>$ qemu-system-x86_64 -enable-kvm -cpu Westmere -m 512M
>>
>>And agree, in general it'd be nice if there was a link to the image as
>>well, so that folks can reproduce.
>
>Yes we have a reproduce s
On 09/08, Jens Axboe wrote:
>On 09/07/2016 08:04 PM, Ye Xiaolong wrote:
>>On 09/08, Fengguang Wu wrote:
>>>Hi Jens and Tejun,
>>>
>>>>The command line was in the original email:
>>>>
>>>>$ qemu-system-x86_64 -enable-kvm -cpu Westmere -
Hi, cheng hao,
On 09/09, chengchao wrote:
>Hi, xiaolong
>
> where can I find the commit 3d26b7622f3bab689696900ffd33c6dd7849d7c2?
This is the commit by 0Day bot for your original email patch sent on Sep 05
where
both CONFIG_PREEMPT_NONE and CONFIG_PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY will turn the
logic on.
+/**
On 08/04, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
>On Thu, Aug 04, 2016 at 04:54:09PM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
>>
>> FYI, we noticed meminfo.AnonHugePages +553.5% increase due to commit:
>>
>> commit 071904e8dfed9525f9da86523caf78b6da5f9e7e ("shmem: get_unmapped_area
>> align huge page")
>> https://git.k
On 08/08, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
>On Sun, 07 Aug 2016 22:02:42 +0800, kernel test robot said:
>
>> FYI, we noticed the following commit:
>>
>> https://github.com/0day-ci/linux
>> Nicholas-Krause/fs-Fix-kmemleak-leak-warning-in-getname_flags-about-working-on-unitialized-memory/20160804-05505
On 08/09, Al Viro wrote:
>On Tue, Aug 09, 2016 at 09:17:58AM +0800, Ye Xiaolong wrote:
>> On 08/08, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
>> >On Sun, 07 Aug 2016 22:02:42 +0800, kernel test robot said:
>> >
>> >> FYI, we noticed the following commit:
>&
On 08/08, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
>On Tue, 09 Aug 2016 09:17:58 +0800, Ye Xiaolong said:
>> On 08/08, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
>> > In other words - how did this patch get into a tree that 0day listens to?
>>
>> 0Day has a service to automatically captu
On 10/16, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>The only change for the non-nowait case is that we now do a trylock before
>locking i_rwsem. In the past that was the more optimal pattern. Can you
>test the patch below if that's not the case anymore? We have a few more
>instances like that which might also w
Hi, Andy
On 10/16, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 3:15 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 10:39:17AM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
>>>
>>> Greeting,
>>>
>>> FYI, we noticed a -61.0% regression of will-it-scale.per_process_ops due to
>>> commit:
>>>
>>>
>>> c
On 10/17, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 06:57:43AM +0200, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
>> On 2017.10.16 at 18:06 -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 3:15 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>> > > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 10:39:17AM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
>> >
On 10/30, Kees Cook wrote:
>On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 9:22 AM, kernel test robot
> wrote:
>>
>> FYI, we noticed the following commit (built with gcc-4.9):
>>
>> commit: 7f7c60e0663645e757e520245606fde9c6e326bb ("printk: hash addresses
>> printed with %p")
>> url:
>> https://github.com/0day-ci/linux
Hi,
On 07/27, Joerg Roedel wrote:
>Hey,
>
>thanks for the report! It did a lot of testing and the issue is fixed
>now with this patch:
>
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1532533683-5988-4-git-send-email-j...@8bytes.org/
>
>I did 2150 runs of your reproducer with the reproducer attached to t
Hi, Steven
On 04/09, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 13:32:52 +0800
>kernel test robot wrote:
>
>> FYI, we noticed the following commit (built with gcc-7):
>>
>> commit: 2580d6b795e25879c825a0891cf67390f665b11f ("init, tracing: Have
>> printk come through the trace events for initcall
On 04/09, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>On Tue, 10 Apr 2018 09:23:40 +0800
>Ye Xiaolong wrote:
>
>> Hi, Steven
>>
>> On 04/09, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>> >On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 13:32:52 +0800
>> >kernel test robot wrote:
>> >
>&g
Hi, Denis
The patch was applied in correct sequence as you can see in the github link.
I think the question here is rtc-isl1208 can be built as a built-in module,
but it would fail if it was built as a ko.
Thanks,
Xiaolong
On 07/10, Denis OSTERLAND wrote:
>Hi,
>
>seems 2/5 was applied before 1/
Hi,
On 06/22, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>Hi Xiaolong,
>
>can you retest this workload on the following branch:
>
>git://git.infradead.org/users/hch/vfs.git remove-get-poll-head
>
>Gitweb:
>
>
> http://git.infradead.org/users/hch/vfs.git/shortlog/refs/heads/remove-get-poll-head
Here is the
On 06/27, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 02:03:38PM +0800, Ye Xiaolong wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 06/22, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> >Hi Xiaolong,
>> >
>> >can you retest this workload on the following branch:
>> >
>>
On 07/04, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>On Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 11:58 PM kernel test robot
>wrote:
>>
>> FYI, we noticed the following commit (built with gcc-7):
>>
>> commit: 8bb2610bc4967f19672444a7b0407367f1540028 ("x86/entry/64/compat:
>> Preserve r8-r11 in int $0x80")
>> [...]
>> caused below chang
On 04/03, Patrick Bellasi wrote:
>Hi Xiaolong,
>
>On 02-Apr 11:20, kernel test robot wrote:
>>
>> Greeting,
>>
>> FYI, we noticed a -9.9% regression of unixbench.score due to commit:
>
>thanks for the report, I'll try to reproduce it locally to better
>understand what's going on.
Thanks for your
On 06/06, Dave Chinner wrote:
>On Tue, Jun 05, 2018 at 03:16:57PM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
>>
>> Greeting,
>>
>> FYI, we noticed a +7.1%% regression of fio.latency_2ms% due to commit:
>>
>>
>> commit: b027d4c97b9675c2ad75dec94be4e46dceb3ec74 ("xfs: don't retry
>> xfs_buf_find on XBF_TRY
On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 04:46:05PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote:
>Hi,
>
>thanks for your report.
>
>On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 12:58:05PM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
>> FYI, we noticed vm-scalability.throughput -23.8% regression due to commit:
>>
>> commit 23047a96d7cfcfca1a6d026ecaec526ea4803e9e
On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 02:06:17PM +0800, Ye Xiaolong wrote:
>On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 04:46:05PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote:
>>Hi,
>>
>>thanks for your report.
>>
>>On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 12:58:05PM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
>>> FYI, we noticed v
On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 03:37:51PM +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
>On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 10:14:37AM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
>> FYI, we noticed that piglit.time.elapsed_time 3.6% regression on
>>
>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git master
>> commit 0bbca274a
Please ignore this report, we just found that it was tested on a virtual
machine, its result is not so reliable. Sorry for that.
On Thu, Apr 07, 2016 at 09:12:45AM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
>FYI, we noticed that xfstests.time.file_system_outputs -6.0% improvement on
>
>https://git.kernel.org
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 09:47:19AM +0200, Eric Auger wrote:
>Hi,
>
Hi, Eric
>Both reported errors related to this series are due to the fact part n
>has dependency on part n-1.
>
If I understand correctly, what you meant is that you send patch series
(let's say B), and B has its dependency patch s
Hi, Joe
Sorry for the late response.
On 04/26, Joe Lawrence wrote:
>>On 04/25/2018 02:28 PM, Joe Lawrence wrote:
>
>> [ ... snip ... ]
>>
>> base-commit: 0adb32858b0bddf4ada5f364a84ed60b196dbcda
>> prerequisite-patch-id: 5ed747c1a89a5dc4bba08186e21f927d7f3bf049
>> prerequisite-patch-id: e9800288
On 11/22, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 10:44 PM, Fengguang Wu wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 02:04:42PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>>
>>> I also noticed that the kernel test robot had screwed up the
>>> participants list for some reason, and had
>>>
>>> "Acked-by: Alexan
On 01/18, Andrew Morton wrote:
>On Wed, 18 Jan 2017 09:23:04 +0800 kernel test robot
>wrote:
>
>>
>> FYI, we noticed the following commit:
>>
>> commit: e5a305ac4a5233e039586c97f4ea643a4c7dc484 ("Reimplement IDR and IDA
>> using the radix tree")
>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/g
On 01/18, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>From: lkp-robot-requ...@eclists.intel.com
>[mailto:lkp-robot-requ...@eclists.intel.com] On Behalf Of kernel test robot
>> FYI, we noticed the following commit:
>>
>> commit: e5a305ac4a5233e039586c97f4ea643a4c7dc484 ("Reimplement IDR
>> and IDA using the radix tree
On 01/24, Michal Hocko wrote:
>On Mon 23-01-17 09:26:44, kernel test robot wrote:
>>
>> Greeting,
>>
>> FYI, we noticed a -11.1% regression of fsmark.files_per_sec due to commit:
>>
>>
>> commit: 5e56dfbd837421b7fa3c6c06018c6701e2704917 ("mm, vmscan: consider
>> eligible zones in get_scan_coun
On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 01:55:26AM +, Peter Chen wrote:
>
>
>>-Original Message-
>>From: lkp-requ...@eclists.intel.com [mailto:lkp-requ...@eclists.intel.com] On
>>Behalf
>>Of kernel test robot
>>Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2016 9:28 AM
>>To: Peter Chen
>>Cc: 0day robot ; LKML ;
>>l...@
On Fri, Jul 01, 2016 at 03:50:32PM +0800, Baoquan He wrote:
>Hi Xiaolong,
>
>Could you please apply below patch and see if it works for you?
Hi, Baoquan,
Please check enclosed dmesg after apply your fix patch, does it meet
your expectation?
Thanks,
Xiaolong
>
>From 46c2a9ecd11f61d952253e005bbd7
On Thu, Jun 02, 2016 at 12:07:06PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote:
>Hi,
>
>On Thu, Jun 02, 2016 at 02:45:07PM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
>> FYI, we noticed pixz.throughput -9.1% regression due to commit:
>>
>> commit 795ae7a0de6b834a0cc202aa55c190ef81496665 ("mm: scale kswapd
>> watermarks in
On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 09:53:25AM +0200, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
>On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 4:17 AM, kernel test robot
> wrote:
>>
>> FYI, we noticed boot-slabinfo.num_objs +31.9% increasement due to commit:
>>
>> commit 55834c59098d0c5a97b0f3247e55832b67facdcf ("mm: kasan: initial memory
>> quarantin
On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 10:44:39PM -0400, William Breathitt Gray wrote:
>On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 10:24:54AM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
>>
>>
>>FYI, we noticed the following commit:
>>
>>https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git master
>>commit 86ea8a95a42f752fe0aa1c7ad
On 10/25, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>On Tue, 25 Oct 2016, kernel test robot wrote:
>> FYI, we noticed a -2.3% regression of will-it-scale.per_thread_ops due to
>> commit:
>>
>> commit 71854cb812ec23bfe5f63d52217e6b9e6cb901f5 ("x86/platform/UV: Fix
>> support for EFI_OLD_MEMMAP after BIOS callback u
On 11/07, Allan W. Nielsen wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I tried to get this "lkp" up and running, but I had some troubles gettting
>these scripts to work.
Hi, Allan
Could you tell us what troubles you have met when trying the "lkp qemu"
tool, it would be better if you could paste some log so we can help to
imp
On 11/16, Duyck, Alexander H wrote:
>On Wed, 2016-11-16 at 05:20 +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
>From what I can tell it looks like the size of the frame is 0x160 hex,
>or 352. For whatever reason we are only pulling 8 bytes into the
>header which is giving us an skb->len of 352 (0x160), and a sk
On 10/12, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
>kernel test robot writes:
>
>> FYI, we noticed the following commit:
>>
>> https://github.com/0day-ci/linux
>> Aneesh-Kumar-K-V/mm-Use-the-correct-page-size-when-removing-the-page/20161012-013446
>> commit c4344e80359420d7574b3b90fddf53311f1d24e6 ("mm: Remove th
On 10/09, Manfred Spraul wrote:
>Hi,
>
>On 10/09/2016 09:05 AM, kernel test robot wrote:
>>FYI, we noticed a -8.8% regression of aim9.shared_memory.ops_per_sec due to
>>commit:
>>
>>commit 0882cba0a03bca73acd8fab8fb50db04691908e9 ("ipc/sem.c: fix
>>complex_count vs. simple op race")
>>https://git
On 10/20, Dou Liyang wrote:
>Hi xiaolong,
>
>Thank you very much for report.
>
>I was just investigating the related problem in another patches.
>
>
>At 10/20/2016 09:16 AM, kernel test robot wrote:
>>
>>FYI, we noticed the following commit:
>>
>>https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torv
On 01/02, Vincent Guittot wrote:
>Hi Xiaolong,
>
>Le Monday 19 Dec 2016 à 08:14:53 (+0800), kernel test robot a écrit :
>>
>> Greeting,
>>
>> FYI, we noticed a -4.5% regression of unixbench.score due to commit:
>
>I have been able to restore performance on my platform with the patch below.
>Could y
On 11/28, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
>On 2016-11-09 14:25:39 [+0800], kernel test robot wrote:
>>
>> FYI, we noticed the following commit:
>>
>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git master
>> commit a7410f28ceb566bda840b4afc278747c63383fb6 ("rcu: update: Make
On 11/29, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 05:21:19PM +, Sudeep Holla wrote:
>> On Sun, Nov 27, 2016 at 6:16 PM, kernel test robot
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > FYI, we noticed the following commit:
>> >
>> > commit e7c1db75fed821a961ce1ca2b602b08e75de0cd8 ("mm: Prevent
>> > __alloc_pag
On 11/29, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 05:21:19PM +, Sudeep Holla wrote:
>> On Sun, Nov 27, 2016 at 6:16 PM, kernel test robot
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > FYI, we noticed the following commit:
>> >
>> > commit e7c1db75fed821a961ce1ca2b602b08e75de0cd8 ("mm: Prevent
>> > __alloc_pag
On 11/28, Jacob Pan wrote:
>On Tue, 29 Nov 2016 07:21:14 +0800
>kbuild test robot wrote:
>
>> Hi Jacob,
>>
>> [auto build test ERROR on soc-thermal/next]
>> [also build test ERROR on v4.9-rc7 next-20161128]
>> [if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a
>> note to help impro
On 11/15, He Chen wrote:
>On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 04:24:39AM +0800, kbuild test robot wrote:
>> Hi He,
>>
>> [auto build test ERROR on kvm/linux-next]
>> [also build test ERROR on v4.9-rc5]
>> [cannot apply to next-20161114]
>> [if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note
On 03/20, Baolin Wang wrote:
>Hi,
>
>
>On 19 March 2017 at 19:42, kbuild test robot wrote:
>> Hi Baolin,
>>
>> [auto build test ERROR on balbi-usb/next]
>> [also build test ERROR on v4.11-rc2 next-20170310]
>> [if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to
>> help impro
On 03/17, Thomas Garnier wrote:
>I tried multiple things to repro this crash without success:
> - Used the config on my existing qemu setup (boot fine)
> - Add most of the command-line (boot fine)
> - Try to run the script on a dedicated machine and it seems it is
>really tailored for your setup. I
On 03/15, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
>On 03/14, Ye Xiaolong wrote:
>> On 03/14, Chao Yu wrote:
>> >On 2017/3/14 3:22, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
>> >> On 03/13, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>> >>> @Chao Yu/@Jaegeuk Kim: I'm considering to add this to the regressions
&
On 03/15, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
>On 03/14, Ye Xiaolong wrote:
>> On 03/14, Chao Yu wrote:
>> >On 2017/3/14 3:22, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
>> >> On 03/13, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>> >>> @Chao Yu/@Jaegeuk Kim: I'm considering to add this to the regressions
&
On 03/16, Michal Hocko wrote:
>On Thu 16-03-17 10:38:49, kernel test robot wrote:
>>
>> FYI, we noticed the following commit:
>>
>> commit: bae58218d80c6beffd5c96c0fcae372a0e63ca32 ("mm: move pcp and lru-pcp
>> draining into single wq")
>> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-
On 03/02, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>Hi,
>
>On Thu, Mar 02, 2017 at 09:09:34AM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
>>
>> FYI, we noticed the following commit:
>>
>> commit: ed3ce2a9172457ef7dbaa9f964e63dfde2bdcb5f ("x86: Optimize
>> clear_page()")
>> url:
>> https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Bo
On 03/08, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
>On 02/17/2017 09:00 PM, kbuild test robot wrote:
>> Hi Zi,
>>
>> [auto build test ERROR on linus/master]
>> [also build test ERROR on v4.10-rc8 next-20170217]
>> [if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to
>> help improve the syste
On 03/03, Pavel Machek wrote:
>Hi!
>
>> [auto build test ERROR on linuxtv-media/master]
>> [also build test ERROR on v4.10 next-20170303]
>> [if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to
>> help improve the system]
>>
>
>Yes, the patch is against Sakari's ccp2 branch.
On 03/09, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 10:13:10AM +0800, Ye Xiaolong wrote:
>> >Anyway, the diff is below, please try that ontop of tip's x86/asm branch
>> >which already has the clear_page patch:
>> >
>> >http://git.kernel.org/cgit
On 03/14, Chao Yu wrote:
>On 2017/3/14 3:22, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
>> On 03/13, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>>> @Chao Yu/@Jaegeuk Kim: I'm considering to add this to the regressions
>>> report for 4.11; or is there a reason why it shouldn't be considered a
>>> regression? Ciao, Thorsten
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>>
On 03/14, Chao Yu wrote:
>On 2017/3/14 3:22, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
>> On 03/13, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>>> @Chao Yu/@Jaegeuk Kim: I'm considering to add this to the regressions
>>> report for 4.11; or is there a reason why it shouldn't be considered a
>>> regression? Ciao, Thorsten
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I
Hi, Michal
On 02/07, Michal Hocko wrote:
[snip]
>Could you retest with a single NUMA node? I am not familiar with the
>benchmark enough to judge it was set up properly for a NUMA machine.
I've retested the commit with a single NUMA node via "numactl -m 0 fs_mark xxx",
and it did help recover the
Hi, liyang
On 02/13, Dou Liyang wrote:
>Hi, Xiaolong
>
>At 02/13/2017 09:37 AM, Ye Xiaolong wrote:
>>On 11/21, Dou Liyang wrote:
>>>Hi, Xiaolong,
>>>
>>>At 11/21/2016 09:31 AM, Ye Xiaolong wrote:
>>>>On 11/18, Dou Liyang wrote:
>>>>
On 02/20, Dou Liyang wrote:
>Currently, We make the mapping of "cpuid <-> nodeid" fixed at the booting time.
>It keeps consistent with the WorkQueue and avoids some bugs which may be caused
>by the dynamic assignment.
>As we know, It is implemented by the patches as follows: 2532fc318d,
>f7c28833c
On 02/20, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>On Sun, Feb 19, 2017 at 6:11 PM, kernel test robot
> wrote:
>>
>> FYI, we noticed the following commit:
>>
>> commit: e70ac171658679ecf6bea4bbd9e9325cd6079d2b ("tcp: tcp_probe: use
>> spin_lock_bh()")
>> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git
Hi, fengguang
On 02/20, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>On Tue, 21 Feb 2017, Fengguang Wu wrote:
>
>> Hi Marc,
>>
>> FYI here is another bisect result. The attached reproduce-* script can
>> be used to reproduce the bug.
>
>Again. This is a problem in the calling code The WARN_ON merily shows the
>wreckag
On 02/21, Ye Xiaolong wrote:
>Hi, fengguang
>On 02/20, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>On Tue, 21 Feb 2017, Fengguang Wu wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Marc,
>>>
>>> FYI here is another bisect result. The attached reproduce-* script can
>>> be used to reproduce
On 02/21, Ye Xiaolong wrote:
>On 02/20, Dou Liyang wrote:
>>Currently, We make the mapping of "cpuid <-> nodeid" fixed at the booting
>>time.
>>It keeps consistent with the WorkQueue and avoids some bugs which may be
>>caused
>>by the dynamic a
On 02/27, Jonathan Woithe wrote:
>On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 09:04:14AM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
>> FYI, we noticed the following commit:
>>
>> commit: a869ab5dabf6ec5327a3b2bb366eccf80b207d76 ("platform/x86:
>> fujitsu-laptop: only register backlight device if FUJ02B1 is present")
>> git://g
On 02/28, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>On Mon, 27 Feb 2017 16:01:34 +0300
>Andrey Ryabinin wrote:
>
>> On 02/27/2017 04:03 AM, kernel test robot wrote:
>> >
>> > FYI, we noticed the following commit:
>> >
>> > commit: 243b72aae28ca1032284028323bb81c9235b15c9 ("x86/mm/ptdump: Optimize
>> > check for
On 02/27, Peter Chen wrote:
>On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 06:19:59PM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
>> [Sorry, resend to correct Felipe's email address]
>>
>> Greetings,
>>
>> This debug patch possibly discloses some USB/I2C bugs. Since the USB
>> warning shows up earlier in dmesg, it might also be the ro
On 02/28, Ye Xiaolong wrote:
>On 02/27, Peter Chen wrote:
>>On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 06:19:59PM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
>>> [Sorry, resend to correct Felipe's email address]
>>>
>>> Greetings,
>>>
>>> This debug patch possibly disc
On 02/05, Wei Yang wrote:
>On Fri, Feb 03, 2017 at 09:44:49AM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
>>
>>FYI, we noticed the following commit:
>>
>>commit: cc4a913fa513cdac8777c2714e6388465691faf8 ("mm/memblock: switch to use
>>NUMA_NO_NODE instead of MAX_NUMNODES in for_each_mem_pfn_range()")
>>url:
>
On 02/06, Michal Hocko wrote:
>On Sat 04-02-17 16:16:04, Ye Xiaolong wrote:
>> On 01/26, Michal Hocko wrote:
>> >On Wed 25-01-17 12:27:06, Ye Xiaolong wrote:
>> >> On 01/24, Michal Hocko wrote:
>[...]
>> >> >perf profiles before and after t
ion is Linux version 4.9.0-rc5-00017-g174cc71 which
means
commit 174cc7187e is the head commit to be built.
Thanks,
Xiaolong
>
>Thanks and best regards
>Lv
>
>> From: lkp-developer-requ...@eclists.intel.com
>> [mailto:lkp-developer-requ...@eclists.intel.com] On
>>
On 01/27, Mika Westerberg wrote:
>On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 07:51:03PM +0800, kbuild test robot wrote:
>> Hi Mika,
>>
>> [auto build test ERROR on pinctrl/for-next]
>> [also build test ERROR on v4.10-rc5 next-20170125]
>> [if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to
>>
On 01/26, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 05:14:06AM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
>>
>> FYI, we noticed the following commit:
>>
>> commit: 9881b024b7d7671f6a014091bc96506b89081802 ("sched/clock: Delay
>> switching sched_clock to stable")
>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux
On 01/26, Michal Hocko wrote:
>On Wed 25-01-17 12:27:06, Ye Xiaolong wrote:
>> On 01/24, Michal Hocko wrote:
>> >On Mon 23-01-17 09:26:44, kernel test robot wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Greeting,
>> >>
>> >> FYI, we
On 08/11, Dave Chinner wrote:
>On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 11:16:12AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
>> I need to see these events:
>>
>> xfs_file*
>> xfs_iomap*
>> xfs_get_block*
>>
>> For both kernels. An example trace from 4.8-rc1 running the command
>> `xfs_io -f -c 'pwrite 0 512k -b 1
On 08/04, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>On Thu, Aug 04, 2016 at 01:24:23PM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
>>
>> FYI, we noticed perf-stat.cpu-migrations -36.0% decrease due to commit:
>>
>> commit e210bffd39d01b649c94b820c28ff112673266dd ("sched/fair: Fix and
>> optimize the fork() path")
>> https://g
On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 04:53:07PM +0800, Ye Xiaolong wrote:
>On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 06:21:09PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote:
>>On Thu, Jun 02, 2016 at 12:07:06PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jun 02, 2016 at 02:45:07PM +0800, ke
On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 05:56:27PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote:
>On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 12:48:17PM +0800, Ye Xiaolong wrote:
>> FYI, below is the comparison info between 3ed3a4f, 795ae7ay, v4.7-rc2 and the
>> revert commit (eaa7f0d).
>
>Thanks for running this.
>
>
Hi, Theodore
On Sun, Jul 10, 2016 at 11:15:53PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
>On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 09:59:54AM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
>>
>> FYI, we noticed the following commit:
>>
>> https://github.com/0day-ci/linux
>> Vegard-Nossum/ext4-validate-number-of-clusters-in-group/20160708-
mailto:lkp-requ...@eclists.intel.com] On
>Behalf Of Ye, Xiaolong
>Sent: Monday, July 11, 2016 2:40 AM
>To: Antoine, Peter
>Cc: Wu, Fengguang ; Alex Dai ; LKML
>; l...@01.org
>Subject: [lkp] [drm/i915/huc] 0a9a963e36: [drm:intel_uc_fw_fetch [i915]]
>*ERROR* Failed to fetch GuC firmware
On Sun, Jul 10, 2016 at 08:28:37PM -0700, Tony Luck wrote:
>I'm very surprised that there was a BERT table on an Atom machine. More
>details about the machine please. Also BIOS version.
Hi, ying
Could you tell me what's BERT table? and how to check the BIOS version?
Thanks,
Xiaolong
>
>Sent fr
Surp:0
Hugepagesize: 2048 kB
DirectMap4k: 63668 kB
DirectMap2M: 8316928 kB
>
>Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Jul 11, 2016, at 17:54, Ye, Xiaolong wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, Jul 10, 2016 at 08:28:37PM -0700, Tony Luck wrote:
>>> I'm very surp
Sorry, it's a duplicated report, please ignore it.
Thanks,
Xiaolong
On 08/18, kernel test robot wrote:
>
>FYI, we noticed the following commit:
>
>https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git master
>commit 5b710f34e194c6b7710f69fdb5d798fdf35b98c1 ("x86/uaccess: Enable harde
On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 06:21:09PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote:
>On Thu, Jun 02, 2016 at 12:07:06PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 02, 2016 at 02:45:07PM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
>> > FYI, we noticed pixz.throughput -9.1% regression due to commit:
>> >
>> > commit
On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 09:49:12PM -0700, Yinghai Lu wrote:
>On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 1:29 PM, Huang, Ying wrote:
>> If you could provide a git branch for that, that will be easier for us
>> to test and more accurate for you to get the right patch to be tested.
>>
>
>Please check
>
>git://git.kerne
On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 01:26:45PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
>On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 09:57:39AM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
>>
>> FYI, we noticed the following commit:
>>
>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git master
>> commit 91c1832579700891747820862633f9a8d0
On 04/19, Dan Williams wrote:
>On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 8:01 PM, kbuild test robot wrote:
>> Hi Dan,
>>
>> [auto build test ERROR on powerpc/next]
>> [also build test ERROR on v4.11-rc7 next-20170419]
>> [if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to
>> help improve the
On 04/27, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
>On 2017-04-27 10:58:36 [+0800], kernel test robot wrote:
>>
>> FYI, we noticed the following commit:
>>
>> commit: 924726b2b5e5000dfb8eb6032651baed1b1bdc6c ("perf: Cure hotplug lock
>> ordering issues")
>> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/t
On 03/31, Ye Xiaolong wrote:
>On 03/31, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
>>On (03/31/17 11:35), Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
>>[..]
>>> > [ 21.009531] VFS: Warning: trinity-c2 using old stat() call. Recompile
>>> > your binary.
>>> > [ 21.148
On 04/11, Paolo Valente wrote:
>
>> Il giorno 02 apr 2017, alle ore 12:02, kbuild test robot ha
>> scritto:
>>
>> Hi Paolo,
>>
>> [auto build test ERROR on block/for-next]
>> [also build test ERROR on v4.11-rc4 next-20170331]
>> [if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a
On 03/31, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
>On (03/31/17 11:35), Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
>[..]
>> > [ 21.009531] VFS: Warning: trinity-c2 using old stat() call. Recompile
>> > your binary.
>> > [ 21.148898] VFS: Warning: trinity-c0 using old stat() call. Recompile
>> > your binary.
>> > [ 22.298
On 04/23, Nicolai Stange wrote:
>Hi Xiaolong,
>
>I'm encountering some difficulties running the reproducer, see below.
>Any help is very welcome!
>
Thanks for watching the report and trying the reproducer.
>
>On Tue, Apr 18 2017, kernel test robot wrote:
>
>> [ 45.772683] BUG: unable to handle
On 07/03, Takashi Iwai wrote:
>On Mon, 03 Jul 2017 04:41:02 +0200,
>kernel test robot wrote:
>>
>>
>> FYI, we noticed the following commit:
>>
>> commit: fcc88d91cd36d1343a0ccc09444b21f6b0dad2d8 ("ALSA: hda - Bind with
>> i915 component before codec binding")
>> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linu
Hi, Ming Lei
On 07/06, Ming Lei wrote:
>Hi Xiaolong,
>
>On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 10:57 AM, kernel test robot
> wrote:
>>
>> Greeting,
>>
>> FYI, we noticed a -10.0% regression of blogbench.read_score due to commit:
>
>Looks like related with mq scheduler, could you test the following patch to see
>i
On 07/06, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>On Thu, 6 Jul 2017, kernel test robot wrote:
>
>> commit: 03fa63cc96ab35592e0a7d522b8edbc1e6b02d22 ("x86/time: Initialize
>> interrupt mode behind timer init")
>
>> ++++
>> || 43436935b7 | 03fa63cc96 |
>> +--
On 07/07, Dou Liyang wrote:
>Hi xiaolong,
>
>Really thanks for your testing.
>
>At 07/07/2017 09:54 AM, Ye Xiaolong wrote:
>>On 07/06, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>>On Thu, 6 Jul 2017, kernel test robot wrote:
>>>
>>>>commit: 03fa63cc96ab
Hi,
On 07/19, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>Hmm. I wonder why the kernel test robot ends up having that annoying
>line doubling for the dmesg.
>
Hmm, this line doubling issue should be caused by we set both
'earlyprintk=ttyS0,115200' and 'console=ttyS0,115200' in cmdline, after I
remove any of it, this
Hi, Shakeel
On 02/25, Shakeel Butt wrote:
>On Sun, Feb 25, 2018 at 6:44 AM, kernel test robot
> wrote:
>>
>> Greeting,
>>
>> FYI, we noticed a -7.9% regression of stress-ng.hdd.ops_per_sec due to
>> commit:
>>
>>
>> commit: 9c4e6b1a7027f102990c0395296015a812525f4d ("mm, mlock, vmscan: no
>> mor
1 - 100 of 132 matches
Mail list logo
