[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <bcf1998e-5efa-4505-a8d2-3381c16de885@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2023 19:50:29 +0700
From: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@...il.com>
To: Thorsten Leemhuis <regressions@...mhuis.info>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Regressions <regressions@...ts.linux.dev>
Subject: Re: what to do on no reproducer case? (was Re: Fwd: Uhhuh. NMI
received for unknown reason 3d/2d/ on CPU xx)
On 21/09/2023 15:10, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> On 20.09.23 02:27, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
>> This regression looks stalled: on Bugzilla, the reporter keeps asking to me,
>> for which I'm not the expert of involved subsystem. And apparently, he still
>> had not any reproducer yet (is it triggered by random chance?). Should I
>> mark this as inconclusive?
>
> Yes, without a reliable bisection result there sometimes is not much we
> can do -- apart from prodding various developers directly and asking for
> help or an idea. But in this case that's not worth it afaics, as
> messages like
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/e08e33d5-4f6d-91aa-f335-9404d16a983c@amd.com/
> indicate that it might be a hardware problem and not really a
> regression. Hence:
>
> #regzbot resolve: inconclusive: not bisected and might be a hardware
> problem after all
>
Thanks for the tip! Now to fix up:
#regzbot inconclusive: regression not bisected - possibly hardware issue
--
An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara
Powered by blists - more mailing lists