Hi Martin, On 18/06/2019 21:58, Martin Blumenstingl wrote: > Hi Guillaume, > > On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 10:53 PM Guillaume Tucker > <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On 18/06/2019 21:42, Martin Blumenstingl wrote: >>> On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 6:53 PM Kevin Hilman <[email protected]> wrote: >>> [...] >>>> This seems to have broken on several sunxi SoCs, but also a MIPS SoC >>>> (pistachio_marduk): >>>> >>>> https://storage.kernelci.org/next/master/next-20190618/mips/pistachio_defconfig/gcc-8/lab-baylibre-seattle/boot-pistachio_marduk.html >>> today I learned why initializing arrays on the stack is important >>> too bad gcc didn't warn that I was about to shoot myself (or someone >>> else) in the foot :/ >>> >>> I just sent a fix: [0] >>> >>> sorry for this issue and thanks to Kernel CI for even pointing out the >>> offending commit (this makes things a lot easier than just yelling >>> that "something is broken") >> >> Glad that helped :) >> >> If you would be so kind as to credit our robot friend in your >> patch, it'll be forever grateful: >> >> Reported-by: "kernelci.org bot" <[email protected]> > sure > do you want me to re-send my other patch or should I just reply to it > adding the Reported-by tag and hope that Dave will catch it when > applying the patch?
Well that's no big deal so replying would already be great. The important part is that the fix gets applied. > in either case: I did mention in the patch description that Kernel CI caught > it I see, thanks! > by the way: I didn't know how to credit the Kernel CI bot. > syzbot / syzkaller makes that bit easy as it's mentioned in the > generated email, see [0] for a (random) example > have you considered adding the Reported-by to the generated email? Yes, we've got some bugs to fix first but that will be added to the email report soon (next week I guess). Thanks for the suggestion though. Guillaume > [0] https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/4/19/638
