Re: [LKP] [lkp-robot] [confidence: ] 7757d607c6 [ 56.996267] BUG: Bad page map in process trinity-c2 pte:0d755065 pmd:0d55b067

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

Re: [LKP] [lkp-robot] [confidence: ] 7757d607c6 [ 56.996267] BUG: Bad page map in process trinity-c2 pte:0d755065 pmd:0d55b067

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

Re: [PATCH v4 2/5] rtc: isl1208: add support for isl1219 with tamper detection

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

Re: [PATCH v4 2/5] rtc: isl1208: add support for isl1219 with tamper detection

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

Re: [lkp-robot] [x86/entry/64/compat] 8bb2610bc4: kernel_selftests.x86.test_syscall_vdso_32.fail

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

Re: [lkp-robot] [x86/entry/64/compat] 8bb2610bc4: kernel_selftests.x86.test_syscall_vdso_32.fail

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

Re: [lkp-robot] [fs] 3deb642f0d: will-it-scale.per_process_ops -8.8% regression

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: >> > >>

Re: [lkp-robot] [fs] 3deb642f0d: will-it-scale.per_process_ops -8.8% regression

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: >> > >>

Re: [lkp-robot] [fs] 3deb642f0d: will-it-scale.per_process_ops -8.8% regression

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

Re: [lkp-robot] [fs] 3deb642f0d: will-it-scale.per_process_ops -8.8% regression

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

Re: [lkp-robot] [xfs] b027d4c97b: fio.latency_2ms% +7.1% regression

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

Re: [lkp-robot] [xfs] b027d4c97b: fio.latency_2ms% +7.1% regression

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

Re: [PATCH v4 0/1] Add livepatch kselftests

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:

Re: [PATCH v4 0/1] Add livepatch kselftests

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:

Re: [lkp-robot] [init, tracing] 2580d6b795: BUG:kernel_reboot-without-warning_in_boot_stage

On 04/09, Steven Rostedt wrote: >On Tue, 10 Apr 2018 09:23:40 +0800 >Ye Xiaolong <xiaolong...@intel.com> wrote: > >> Hi, Steven >> >> On 04/09, Steven Rostedt wrote: >> >On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 13:32:52 +0800 >> >kernel test robot <xiao

Re: [lkp-robot] [init, tracing] 2580d6b795: BUG:kernel_reboot-without-warning_in_boot_stage

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

Re: [lkp-robot] [init, tracing] 2580d6b795: BUG:kernel_reboot-without-warning_in_boot_stage

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

Re: [lkp-robot] [init, tracing] 2580d6b795: BUG:kernel_reboot-without-warning_in_boot_stage

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

Re: [lkp-robot] [sched/fair] d519329f72: unixbench.score -9.9% regression

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

Re: [lkp-robot] [sched/fair] d519329f72: unixbench.score -9.9% regression

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

Re: [lkp-robot] [iversion] c0cef30e4f: aim7.jobs-per-min -18.0% regression

On 02/25, Jeff Layton wrote: >On Sun, 2018-02-25 at 23:05 +0800, kernel test robot wrote: >> Greeting, >> >> FYI, we noticed a -18.0% regression of aim7.jobs-per-min due to commit: >> >> >> commit: c0cef30e4ff0dc025f4a1660b8f0ba43ed58426e ("iversion: make >> inode_cmp_iversion{+raw} return

Re: [lkp-robot] [iversion] c0cef30e4f: aim7.jobs-per-min -18.0% regression

On 02/25, Jeff Layton wrote: >On Sun, 2018-02-25 at 23:05 +0800, kernel test robot wrote: >> Greeting, >> >> FYI, we noticed a -18.0% regression of aim7.jobs-per-min due to commit: >> >> >> commit: c0cef30e4ff0dc025f4a1660b8f0ba43ed58426e ("iversion: make >> inode_cmp_iversion{+raw} return

Re: [lkp-robot] [mm, mlock, vmscan] 9c4e6b1a70: stress-ng.hdd.ops_per_sec -7.9% regression

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,

Re: [lkp-robot] [mm, mlock, vmscan] 9c4e6b1a70: stress-ng.hdd.ops_per_sec -7.9% regression

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 >>

Re: [lkp-robot] [torture] b151f93a71: INFO:rcu_preempt_detected_stalls_on_CPUs/tasks

On 11/27, Paul E. McKenney wrote: >On Sun, Nov 26, 2017 at 04:42:03PM +0800, kernel test robot wrote: >> >> FYI, we noticed the following commit (built with gcc-6): >> >> commit: b151f93a71fc9fecb560e823a92402d882516483 ("torture: Eliminate >> torture_runnable") >>

Re: [lkp-robot] [torture] b151f93a71: INFO:rcu_preempt_detected_stalls_on_CPUs/tasks

On 11/27, Paul E. McKenney wrote: >On Sun, Nov 26, 2017 at 04:42:03PM +0800, kernel test robot wrote: >> >> FYI, we noticed the following commit (built with gcc-6): >> >> commit: b151f93a71fc9fecb560e823a92402d882516483 ("torture: Eliminate >> torture_runnable") >>

Re: [lkp-robot] [fw_cfg] 05b5d5161b: WARNING:at_drivers/firmware/qemu_fw_cfg.c:#fw_cfg_dma_transfer

On 11/16, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 08:58:13AM +0800, kernel test robot wrote: >> >> FYI, we noticed the following commit (built with gcc-6): >> >> commit: 05b5d5161b9e6c72e1d06f36614edbdbfe192cc7 ("fw_cfg: do DMA read >> operation") >>

Re: [lkp-robot] [fw_cfg] 05b5d5161b: WARNING:at_drivers/firmware/qemu_fw_cfg.c:#fw_cfg_dma_transfer

On 11/16, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 08:58:13AM +0800, kernel test robot wrote: >> >> FYI, we noticed the following commit (built with gcc-6): >> >> commit: 05b5d5161b9e6c72e1d06f36614edbdbfe192cc7 ("fw_cfg: do DMA read >> operation") >>

Re: [lkp-robot] [printk] 7f7c60e066: BUG:KASAN:slab-out-of-bounds

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: >>

Re: [lkp-robot] [printk] 7f7c60e066: BUG:KASAN:slab-out-of-bounds

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: >>

Re: [lkp-robot] [x86/mm] c4c3c3c2d0: will-it-scale.per_process_ops -61.0% regression

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

Re: [lkp-robot] [x86/mm] c4c3c3c2d0: will-it-scale.per_process_ops -61.0% regression

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: >>

Re: [lkp-robot] [x86/mm] c4c3c3c2d0: will-it-scale.per_process_ops -61.0% regression

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 >>>

Re: [lkp-robot] [x86/mm] c4c3c3c2d0: will-it-scale.per_process_ops -61.0% regression

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: >>> >>> >>>

Re: [lkp-robot] [fs] 91f9943e1c: aim7.jobs-per-min -26.6% regression

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

Re: [lkp-robot] [fs] 91f9943e1c: aim7.jobs-per-min -26.6% regression

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

Re: [lkp-robot] [blk] 47e0fb461f: BUG:unable_to_handle_kernel

On 10/09, Tejun Heo wrote: >Hello, > >On Sat, Sep 30, 2017 at 01:21:13PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: >> Tejun, any ideas? The original report is at >> >>https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/9/20/939 >> >> in case you don't see it in your inbox from lkml. > >So, in the full log, there is an earlier

Re: [lkp-robot] [blk] 47e0fb461f: BUG:unable_to_handle_kernel

On 10/09, Tejun Heo wrote: >Hello, > >On Sat, Sep 30, 2017 at 01:21:13PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: >> Tejun, any ideas? The original report is at >> >>https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/9/20/939 >> >> in case you don't see it in your inbox from lkml. > >So, in the full log, there is an earlier

Re: [lkp-robot] [blk] 47e0fb461f: BUG:unable_to_handle_kernel

On 09/30, Linus Torvalds wrote: >On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 12:02 AM, NeilBrown wrote: >> >> I think it is crashing in >> static inline bool ata_is_host_link(const struct ata_link *link) >> { >> return link == >ap->link || link == link->ap->slave_link; >> } > >Yes. The code

Re: [lkp-robot] [blk] 47e0fb461f: BUG:unable_to_handle_kernel

On 09/30, Linus Torvalds wrote: >On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 12:02 AM, NeilBrown wrote: >> >> I think it is crashing in >> static inline bool ata_is_host_link(const struct ata_link *link) >> { >> return link == >ap->link || link == link->ap->slave_link; >> } > >Yes. The code is > > 1a: 8b 3a

Re: [PATCH] x86/asm: Fix inline asm call constraints for GCC 4.4

h implies >debugging. > >( Sometimes we refer to 'debugging a bug' as the reporter adding printks on > request and printing out key state that helps understand the bug. It does > not > necessarily imply root-causing the bug. ) > >Also note that I added a "Reported-and-Bisected-by:" tag for the ktest robot, >to >further credit the fact that in addition to reporting a kernel crash, a >specific >commit was bisected to as well. > >I'll wait for another round of ktest robot testing to make sure the crash is >indeed fixed. The panic is gone with the fix patch for 4 times test. Tested-by: Ye Xiaolong <xiaolong...@intel.com> Thanks, Xiaolong > >Thanks, > > Ingo

Re: [PATCH] x86/asm: Fix inline asm call constraints for GCC 4.4

It does > not > necessarily imply root-causing the bug. ) > >Also note that I added a "Reported-and-Bisected-by:" tag for the ktest robot, >to >further credit the fact that in addition to reporting a kernel crash, a >specific >commit was bisected to as well. > >I'll wait for another round of ktest robot testing to make sure the crash is >indeed fixed. The panic is gone with the fix patch for 4 times test. Tested-by: Ye Xiaolong Thanks, Xiaolong > >Thanks, > > Ingo

Re: [lkp-robot] [irda] 66d98e78e4: BUG:unable_to_handle_kernel

On 08/30, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: >On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 02:04:11PM +0800, kernel test robot wrote: >> FYI, we noticed the following commit: >> >> commit: 66d98e78e44ccb969cb3196995759d200e64b49b ("irda: move net/irda/ to >> drivers/staging/irda/net/") >> url: >>

Re: [lkp-robot] [irda] 66d98e78e4: BUG:unable_to_handle_kernel

On 08/30, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: >On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 02:04:11PM +0800, kernel test robot wrote: >> FYI, we noticed the following commit: >> >> commit: 66d98e78e44ccb969cb3196995759d200e64b49b ("irda: move net/irda/ to >> drivers/staging/irda/net/") >> url: >>

Re: [PATCH] ARM: sun8i: a83t: Add device tree for Sinovoip Bananapi BPI-M3

On 08/20, icen...@aosc.io wrote: >在 2017-08-20 08:59，kbuild test robot 写道： >>Hi Chen-Yu, >> >>[auto build test ERROR on robh/for-next] >>[also build test ERROR on v4.13-rc5 next-20170817] >>[if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note >>to help improve the system] > >In

Re: [PATCH] ARM: sun8i: a83t: Add device tree for Sinovoip Bananapi BPI-M3

On 08/20, icen...@aosc.io wrote: >在 2017-08-20 08:59，kbuild test robot 写道： >>Hi Chen-Yu, >> >>[auto build test ERROR on robh/for-next] >>[also build test ERROR on v4.13-rc5 next-20170817] >>[if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note >>to help improve the system] > >In

Re: [lkp-robot] [mm] 7674270022: will-it-scale.per_process_ops -19.3% regression

On 08/08, Minchan Kim wrote: >On Mon, Aug 07, 2017 at 10:51:00PM -0700, Nadav Amit wrote: >> Nadav Amit wrote: >> >> > Minchan Kim wrote: >> > >> >> Hi, >> >> >> >> On Tue, Aug 08, 2017 at 09:19:23AM +0800, kernel test robot wrote: >> >>> Greeting, >>

Re: [lkp-robot] [mm] 7674270022: will-it-scale.per_process_ops -19.3% regression

On 08/08, Minchan Kim wrote: >On Mon, Aug 07, 2017 at 10:51:00PM -0700, Nadav Amit wrote: >> Nadav Amit wrote: >> >> > Minchan Kim wrote: >> > >> >> Hi, >> >> >> >> On Tue, Aug 08, 2017 at 09:19:23AM +0800, kernel test robot wrote: >> >>> Greeting, >> >>> >> >>> FYI, we noticed a -19.3%

Re: [lkp-robot] [mm] 7674270022: will-it-scale.per_process_ops -19.3% regression

On 08/08, Minchan Kim wrote: >On Mon, Aug 07, 2017 at 10:51:00PM -0700, Nadav Amit wrote: >> Nadav Amit wrote: >> >> > Minchan Kim wrote: >> > >> >> Hi, >> >> >> >> On Tue, Aug 08, 2017 at 09:19:23AM +0800, kernel test robot wrote: >> >>> Greeting, >>

Re: [lkp-robot] [mm] 7674270022: will-it-scale.per_process_ops -19.3% regression

On 08/08, Minchan Kim wrote: >On Mon, Aug 07, 2017 at 10:51:00PM -0700, Nadav Amit wrote: >> Nadav Amit wrote: >> >> > Minchan Kim wrote: >> > >> >> Hi, >> >> >> >> On Tue, Aug 08, 2017 at 09:19:23AM +0800, kernel test robot wrote: >> >>> Greeting, >> >>> >> >>> FYI, we noticed a -19.3%

Re: [lkp-robot] [include/linux/string.h] 6974f0c455: kernel_BUG_at_lib/string.c

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

Re: [lkp-robot] [include/linux/string.h] 6974f0c455: kernel_BUG_at_lib/string.c

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

Re: [x86/time] 03fa63cc96: ACPI_Error:Table[DMAR]is_not_invalidated_during_early_boot_stage(#/tbxface -#)

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

Re: [x86/time] 03fa63cc96: ACPI_Error:Table[DMAR]is_not_invalidated_during_early_boot_stage(#/tbxface -#)

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

Re: [x86/time] 03fa63cc96: ACPI_Error:Table[DMAR]is_not_invalidated_during_early_boot_stage(#/tbxface -#)

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 | >>

Re: [x86/time] 03fa63cc96: ACPI_Error:Table[DMAR]is_not_invalidated_during_early_boot_stage(#/tbxface -#)

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 | >>

Re: [lkp-robot] [scsi] 5c279bd9e4: blogbench.read_score -10.0% regression

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

Re: [lkp-robot] [scsi] 5c279bd9e4: blogbench.read_score -10.0% regression

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

Re: [lkp-robot] [ALSA] fcc88d91cd: WARNING:at_sound/hda/hdac_i915.c:#snd_hdac_i915_init[snd_hda_core]

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") >>

Re: [lkp-robot] [ALSA] fcc88d91cd: WARNING:at_sound/hda/hdac_i915.c:#snd_hdac_i915_init[snd_hda_core]

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") >>

Re: [kbuild-all] [PATCH] include/linux/vfio.h: Guard powerpc-specific functions with CONFIG_VFIO_SPAPR_EEH

On 06/08, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: >On 08/06/17 15:35, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: >> Hi, >> >> How did you manage to have CONFIG_EEH=y and CONFIG_VFIO_SPAPR_EEH=n? "make >> oldconfig" fixes this to CONFIG_VFIO_SPAPR_EEH=y. > > >Also, the attached config has "CONFIG_VFIO_SPAPR_EEH=m" and

Re: [kbuild-all] [PATCH] include/linux/vfio.h: Guard powerpc-specific functions with CONFIG_VFIO_SPAPR_EEH

On 06/08, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: >On 08/06/17 15:35, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: >> Hi, >> >> How did you manage to have CONFIG_EEH=y and CONFIG_VFIO_SPAPR_EEH=n? "make >> oldconfig" fixes this to CONFIG_VFIO_SPAPR_EEH=y. > > >Also, the attached config has "CONFIG_VFIO_SPAPR_EEH=m" and

Re: [posix] 91d57bae08: WARNING:at_kernel/time/hrtimer.c:#hrtimer_forward

On 06/12, Thomas Gleixner wrote: >On Fri, 9 Jun 2017, kernel test robot wrote: >> >> FYI, we noticed the following commit: >> >> commit: 91d57bae08689199c8acc77a8b3b41150cafab1c ("posix-timers: Make use of >> forward/remaining callbacks") >>

Re: [posix] 91d57bae08: WARNING:at_kernel/time/hrtimer.c:#hrtimer_forward

On 06/12, Thomas Gleixner wrote: >On Fri, 9 Jun 2017, kernel test robot wrote: >> >> FYI, we noticed the following commit: >> >> commit: 91d57bae08689199c8acc77a8b3b41150cafab1c ("posix-timers: Make use of >> forward/remaining callbacks") >>

Re: [lkp-robot] [mm, memcg] b4536f0c82: kobject(#):tried_to_init_an_initialized_object,something_is_seriously_wrong

On 06/12, Michal Hocko wrote: >On Mon 12-06-17 14:59:45, kernel test robot wrote: >> >> FYI, we noticed the following commit: >> >> commit: b4536f0c829c8586544c94735c343f9b5070bd01 ("mm, memcg: fix the active >> list aging for lowmem requests when memcg is enabled") >>

Re: [lkp-robot] [mm, memcg] b4536f0c82: kobject(#):tried_to_init_an_initialized_object,something_is_seriously_wrong

On 06/12, Michal Hocko wrote: >On Mon 12-06-17 14:59:45, kernel test robot wrote: >> >> FYI, we noticed the following commit: >> >> commit: b4536f0c829c8586544c94735c343f9b5070bd01 ("mm, memcg: fix the active >> list aging for lowmem requests when memcg is enabled") >>

Re: [LKP] [lkp-robot] [EDAC, sb_edac] e2f747b1f4: kmsg.EDAC_sbridge:Failed_to_register_device_with_error

On 06/12, Ye Xiaolong wrote: >On 06/10, Zhuo, Qiuxu wrote: >>> From: Borislav Petkov [mailto:b...@alien8.de] >>> >>> Xiaolong, >>> >>> can you please run Qiuxu's patch to verify it fixes your issue? >> >> >>Hi Boris, >>

Re: [LKP] [lkp-robot] [EDAC, sb_edac] e2f747b1f4: kmsg.EDAC_sbridge:Failed_to_register_device_with_error

On 06/12, Ye Xiaolong wrote: >On 06/10, Zhuo, Qiuxu wrote: >>> From: Borislav Petkov [mailto:b...@alien8.de] >>> >>> Xiaolong, >>> >>> can you please run Qiuxu's patch to verify it fixes your issue? >> >> >>Hi Boris, >>

Re: [lkp-robot] [EDAC, sb_edac] e2f747b1f4: kmsg.EDAC_sbridge:Failed_to_register_device_with_error

On 06/10, Zhuo, Qiuxu wrote: >> From: Borislav Petkov [mailto:b...@alien8.de] >> >> Xiaolong, >> >> can you please run Qiuxu's patch to verify it fixes your issue? > > >Hi Boris, >I manually verified the fix patch on the Broadwell-DE server on which the > bug was found by Xiaolong: >the

Re: [lkp-robot] [EDAC, sb_edac] e2f747b1f4: kmsg.EDAC_sbridge:Failed_to_register_device_with_error

On 06/10, Zhuo, Qiuxu wrote: >> From: Borislav Petkov [mailto:b...@alien8.de] >> >> Xiaolong, >> >> can you please run Qiuxu's patch to verify it fixes your issue? > > >Hi Boris, >I manually verified the fix patch on the Broadwell-DE server on which the > bug was found by Xiaolong: >the

Re: [lkp-robot] [KEYS] 501901ac94: ltp.add_key02.fail

On 06/09, David Howells wrote: >kernel test robot wrote: > >> user :notice: [ 82.772613] add_key02.c:65: FAIL: add_key() failed >> unexpectedly, expected EINVAL: EFAULT > >The LTP test needs updating. Eric has a patch for that. Got it, thanks for the information.

Re: [lkp-robot] [KEYS] 501901ac94: ltp.add_key02.fail

On 06/09, David Howells wrote: >kernel test robot wrote: > >> user :notice: [ 82.772613] add_key02.c:65: FAIL: add_key() failed >> unexpectedly, expected EINVAL: EFAULT > >The LTP test needs updating. Eric has a patch for that. Got it, thanks for the information. Thanks, Xiaolong > >David

Re: [kbuild-all] [PATCH v4 3/9] arm: dts: mt7623: add mt7623-mt6323.dtsi file

Hi, Matthias On 05/29, Matthias Brugger wrote: > > >On 28/05/17 13:31, kbuild test robot wrote: >>Hi John, >> >>[auto build test ERROR on robh/for-next] >>[also build test ERROR on v4.12-rc2 next-20170526] >>[if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to >>help improve

Re: [kbuild-all] [PATCH v4 3/9] arm: dts: mt7623: add mt7623-mt6323.dtsi file

Hi, Matthias On 05/29, Matthias Brugger wrote: > > >On 28/05/17 13:31, kbuild test robot wrote: >>Hi John, >> >>[auto build test ERROR on robh/for-next] >>[also build test ERROR on v4.12-rc2 next-20170526] >>[if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to >>help improve

Re: [kbuild-all] [PATCH v4 2/3] hwmon: (adt7475) temperature smoothing

On 05/16, Guenter Roeck wrote: 0day bot applied your patchset on top of commit 6eaaea1 ("hwmon: (pmbus) Add client driver for IR35221"), is it wrong or you have some prerequisite patches? >> >>Thanks for the info, seems we need to improve the kbuild bot by pulling the >>latest tree

Re: [kbuild-all] [PATCH v4 2/3] hwmon: (adt7475) temperature smoothing

On 05/16, Guenter Roeck wrote: 0day bot applied your patchset on top of commit 6eaaea1 ("hwmon: (pmbus) Add client driver for IR35221"), is it wrong or you have some prerequisite patches? >> >>Thanks for the info, seems we need to improve the kbuild bot by pulling the >>latest tree

Re: [kbuild-all] [PATCH v4 2/3] hwmon: (adt7475) temperature smoothing

On 05/17, Chris Packham wrote: >On 17/05/17 15:09, Ye Xiaolong wrote: >> On 05/16, Chris Packham wrote: >>> On 16/05/17 20:23, kbuild test robot wrote: >>>> Hi Chris, >>>> >>>> [auto build test ERROR on hwmon/hwmon-next] >>>> [als

Re: [kbuild-all] [PATCH v4 2/3] hwmon: (adt7475) temperature smoothing

On 05/17, Chris Packham wrote: >On 17/05/17 15:09, Ye Xiaolong wrote: >> On 05/16, Chris Packham wrote: >>> On 16/05/17 20:23, kbuild test robot wrote: >>>> Hi Chris, >>>> >>>> [auto build test ERROR on hwmon/hwmon-next] >>>> [als

Re: [kbuild-all] [PATCH v4 2/3] hwmon: (adt7475) temperature smoothing

On 05/16, Chris Packham wrote: >On 16/05/17 20:23, kbuild test robot wrote: >> Hi Chris, >> >> [auto build test ERROR on hwmon/hwmon-next] >> [also build test ERROR on v4.12-rc1 next-20170516] >> [if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to >> help improve the system]

Re: [kbuild-all] [PATCH v4 2/3] hwmon: (adt7475) temperature smoothing

On 05/16, Chris Packham wrote: >On 16/05/17 20:23, kbuild test robot wrote: >> Hi Chris, >> >> [auto build test ERROR on hwmon/hwmon-next] >> [also build test ERROR on v4.12-rc1 next-20170516] >> [if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to >> help improve the system]

Re: [lkp-robot] [asm] c1aad8dcc4: BUG:kernel_hang_in_boot_stage

On 05/16, Al Viro wrote: >On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 09:19:57AM +0800, kernel test robot wrote: >> >> FYI, we noticed the following commit: >> >> commit: c1aad8dcc49382399f48541dc47b6e30b0ef1b62 ("asm-generic: zero in >> __get_user(), not __get_user_fn()") >>

Re: [lkp-robot] [asm] c1aad8dcc4: BUG:kernel_hang_in_boot_stage

On 05/16, Al Viro wrote: >On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 09:19:57AM +0800, kernel test robot wrote: >> >> FYI, we noticed the following commit: >> >> commit: c1aad8dcc49382399f48541dc47b6e30b0ef1b62 ("asm-generic: zero in >> __get_user(), not __get_user_fn()") >>

Re: [lkp-robot] [rcuperf] 87c458e630: WARNING:at_arch/x86/kernel/smp.c:#native_smp_send_reschedule

On 05/03, Paul E. McKenney wrote: >On Thu, May 04, 2017 at 10:59:26AM +0800, kernel test robot wrote: >> >> FYI, we noticed the following commit: >> >> commit: 87c458e6304c6a1b37bf856e88c70fc37f08851f ("rcuperf: Set more >> user-friendly defaults") >>

Re: [lkp-robot] [rcuperf] 87c458e630: WARNING:at_arch/x86/kernel/smp.c:#native_smp_send_reschedule

On 05/03, Paul E. McKenney wrote: >On Thu, May 04, 2017 at 10:59:26AM +0800, kernel test robot wrote: >> >> FYI, we noticed the following commit: >> >> commit: 87c458e6304c6a1b37bf856e88c70fc37f08851f ("rcuperf: Set more >> user-friendly defaults") >>

Re: [lkp-robot] [perf] 924726b2b5: double_fault:#[##]

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") >>

Re: [lkp-robot] [perf] 924726b2b5: double_fault:#[##]

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") >>

Re: [kbuild-all] [PATCH v3] axon_ram: add dax_operations support

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 >>

Re: [kbuild-all] [PATCH v3] axon_ram: add dax_operations support

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

Re: [lkp-robot] [debugfs] f3e7155d08: BUG:unable_to_handle_kernel

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

Re: [lkp-robot] [debugfs] f3e7155d08: BUG:unable_to_handle_kernel

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

Re: [kbuild-all] [PATCH V2 16/16] block, bfq: split bfq-iosched.c into multiple source files

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,

Re: [kbuild-all] [PATCH V2 16/16] block, bfq: split bfq-iosched.c into multiple source files

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

Re: [printk] fbc14616f4: BUG:kernel_reboot-without-warning_in_test_stage

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

Re: [printk] fbc14616f4: BUG:kernel_reboot-without-warning_in_test_stage

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

Re: [printk] fbc14616f4: BUG:kernel_reboot-without-warning_in_test_stage

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. >> > [

Re: [printk] fbc14616f4: BUG:kernel_reboot-without-warning_in_test_stage

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. >> > [

Re: [kbuild-all] [PATCH 1/2] usb: phy: Introduce one extcon device into usb phy

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

Re: [kbuild-all] [PATCH 1/2] usb: phy: Introduce one extcon device into usb phy

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

Re: [x86] 45fc8757d1: BUG:unable_to_handle_kernel

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.

Re: [x86] 45fc8757d1: BUG:unable_to_handle_kernel

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.

  1   2   3   >