On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 6:09 AM, Zhang Rui <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, 2017-12-10 at 12:30 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: >> On Sun, Dec 10, 2017 at 10:56 AM, Pavel Machek <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > >> > Confirmed, revert fixes it. You see how it moves >> > fix_processor_context >> > around #ifdef CONFIG_X86_32 block? And how people forget 32-bit >> > machines exist? Aha. >> Yeah, people do. >> >> Andy? >> >> > >> > Which brings me to .. various people do automated testing of >> > kernel. Testing 32-bit kernel for boot, and both 32-bit and 64-bit >> > for >> > boot and suspend would be very nice. The last item is not hard, >> > either: >> > >> > sudo rtcwake -l -m mem -s 5 >> > >> > ...should take 10 seconds or so. >> I'm told 0day does *some* suspend/resume testing, but I think it's >> pretty limited, partly because the kinds of machines it primarily >> works on don't really support suspend/resume at all. > > currently, we're running suspend test on 1 platform only, with 64 bit > kernel. suspend test will be enabled on more platforms (laptops) in > next two weeks. > > I will check why it does not find the first regression introduced by > ca37e57bbe0c ("x86/entry/64: Add missing irqflags tracing to > native_load_gs_index()"). > >> I'm also not sure >> just how many of those machines are 32-bit at all.. > > for this, I suppose it can be reproduced if we use 32-bit kernel and > rootfs, right? Then it's easier to enable this in 0Day. >
Yes. The 64-bit problem should also be reproducible with rtcwake even in a vm. Also, on this topic, could make run_tests in tools/testing/selftests/x86 be added to the rotation as well? The testing dir should match the kernel being tested IMO. > thanks, > rui >> >> But I'm adding Zhang Rui to the cc, to see if my recollection is >> right. >> >> Because you're right, more suspend/resume automated testing would be >> good to have. And yes, people test mainly 64-bit these days. >> >> Also, I'm not even sure what the 0day rules are for just plain >> mainline. I don't tend to see a lot of breakage reports, even though >> I'd expect to. This came in from the x86 trees (and those do their >> own >> tests too, but probably not suspend/resume either), but it hit my >> tree >> fairly soon after going into the x86 -tip trees. >> >> Linus
