linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4.9 000/116] 4.9.2-stable review

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20170107132458.GB29406@kroah.com>
Date:   Sat, 7 Jan 2017 14:24:58 +0100
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     "kernelci.org bot" <bot@...nelci.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux@...ck-us.net,
        shuah.kh@...sung.com, patches@...nelci.org,
        ben.hutchings@...ethink.co.uk, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.9 000/116] 4.9.2-stable review

On Fri, Jan 06, 2017 at 09:42:24PM -0800, kernelci.org bot wrote:
> stable-rc boot: 513 boots: 4 failed, 489 passed with 20 offline (v4.9.1-117-ge3bc65e52a08)
> 
> Full Boot Summary: https://kernelci.org/boot/all/job/stable-rc/kernel/v4.9.1-117-ge3bc65e52a08/
> Full Build Summary: https://kernelci.org/build/stable-rc/kernel/v4.9.1-117-ge3bc65e52a08/
> 
> Tree: stable-rc
> Branch: local/linux-4.9.y
> Git Describe: v4.9.1-117-ge3bc65e52a08
> Git Commit: e3bc65e52a086ea9bcc31605737bbf0476f9bcd3
> Git URL: http://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git
> Tested: 88 unique boards, 25 SoC families, 35 builds out of 206
> 
> Boot Regressions Detected:
> 
> arm:
> 
>     multi_v7_defconfig+CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING=y:
>         vexpress-v2p-ca15_a7:
>             lab-broonie: new failure (last pass: v4.9.1)
> 
> Boot Failures Detected:
> 
> arm:
> 
>     multi_v7_defconfig+CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING=y
>         vexpress-v2p-ca15_a7: 1 failed lab
> 
>     sunxi_defconfig
>         sun4i-a10-cubieboard: 1 failed lab
> 
>     exynos_defconfig
>         exynos5422-odroidxu3_rootfs:nfs: 1 failed lab
> 
> arm64:
> 
>     defconfig+CONFIG_CPU_BIG_ENDIAN=y
>         juno-r2: 1 failed lab

Are all of these really "failures"?  Some of them seem like they really
did boot, but the test system didn't detect it?

I don't know what to do with these reports, should I trust them that I
broke something, or just ignore them and let someone else dig into them
to determine if it's a false-positive or something like that?

thanks,

greg k-h