[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CABXOdTeza3ZJRO7eexp8evm8o1B81fw9cDQbE_nHwqhufMCfGA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2024 09:22:59 -0800
From: Guenter Roeck <groeck@...gle.com>
To: Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...uxfoundation.org>, Nikolai Kondrashov <spbnick@...il.com>,
Helen Koike <helen.koike@...labora.com>, linuxtv-ci@...uxtv.org,
dave.pigott@...labora.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
gustavo.padovan@...labora.com, pawiecz@...labora.com,
tales.aparecida@...il.com, workflows@...r.kernel.org,
kernelci@...ts.linux.dev, skhan@...uxfoundation.org,
kunit-dev@...glegroups.com, nfraprado@...labora.com, davidgow@...gle.com,
cocci@...ia.fr, Julia.Lawall@...ia.fr, laura.nao@...labora.com,
ricardo.canuelo@...labora.com, kernel@...labora.com,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] kci-gitlab: Introducing GitLab-CI Pipeline for Kernel Testing
On Mon, Mar 4, 2024 at 9:09 AM Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org> wrote:
> And singling out DRM because it regularly allegedly breaks things on
> xtensa or m68k and claiming we're not taking CI seriously because of it
> is completely ridiculous. If the all the subsystems were taking CI as
> seriously as DRM, we would be in a much better place.
>
The failure I reported as an example was on arm, not on xtensa or m68k
I'll disable CONFIG_DRM in my build tests for xtensa and m68k going
forward.
Thanks,
Guenter
Powered by blists - more mailing lists