From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1ED10C7618B for ; Thu, 25 Jul 2019 14:05:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E969922BF5 for ; Thu, 25 Jul 2019 14:05:30 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linaro.org header.i=@linaro.org header.b="p4Ymi9d4" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726945AbfGYOFa (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Jul 2019 10:05:30 -0400 Received: from mail-lf1-f67.google.com ([209.85.167.67]:38513 "EHLO mail-lf1-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727209AbfGYOF1 (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Jul 2019 10:05:27 -0400 Received: by mail-lf1-f67.google.com with SMTP id h28so34591325lfj.5 for ; Thu, 25 Jul 2019 07:05:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=d9/jZZ/wGnP4XWWrJc72aqLii2UTG2NwmOzZLmtfRTs=; b=p4Ymi9d4D9XehufPPYM3MBV2tV9cdOfbvGrKviwyG9mm1Fz+1Lhj/EvtnJFkUuvb/M Dvp3VSClPna6uot0vw3CeRe0QVO8nHL9jDc+8gLAiiBQvM7wdLspbW75YMB0Ww/+FeoV riLvHNfz3XNWziFaCqafOlGiHbZ0Wt8FWFrNdGMX/6luZQ0UWqicnNQSDQiFnMYKfVMe Gfo+VMlNlmk4dFTfWVf6LrsMH2+X73YQu0rSqumeYwVBUYgvjR4Za1ISnUUyAb2Lv9Iw fPNmxkEWtnjoJ9Q6vw24BrmrLRn6qsngmwjFse3wrINa4AjDAD6y/+5ZPIpTESFFGrhh 7Pgw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=d9/jZZ/wGnP4XWWrJc72aqLii2UTG2NwmOzZLmtfRTs=; b=Gl03PRPhAS1lbGpIfgYpAOUEEpgTvLGNOxwcpSxWATbQ3t4/xGjWIhADEfgvSh+1fA +a9keIyqVxOgMc5lveHA6LN9m4zcsIFgpdAjlBuf7h2oJ0PKX3/jaAcDLHdALJByJXST C2tBA3E8VsdelYxl28efg/u8qDcplYlvnB/2LULBSA0wjDPqdWXBDOka1xI/b0xzZBrH X+t7nVu/LWlkv0gZUfG6pGZ8p3Ys5hdPW0+nXJ4N7aIInO0wkvq/xooBclVBRk7dD/bj sziKHG3s+BH+8Y2WqEz2z+treUEx4/WIfyIHwUmKpj51TFzgHvpf71LMb7LT1g851yRq 0txg== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAW2LSsDNi03Dc3xiki7DxEJm7Z1sezTdAu1e5xVqFL3GK6KS6cA IvUKmZnJJ6AUZTrLj0erSei0Lbtqsbc1k5viLJBt2j/Vk8c= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqw49ekawAIJPp2WQWsuoc36ITRLiJynGhiqAqMikOBa1iHIBQHs/lNKNYo3CAFkg4pZfV1Z78Uez67ejwLDOic= X-Received: by 2002:ac2:546a:: with SMTP id e10mr42095604lfn.75.1564063525132; Thu, 25 Jul 2019 07:05:25 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190724191735.096702571@linuxfoundation.org> <20190725113437.GA27429@kroah.com> <230a5b34-d23e-8318-0b1f-d23ada7318e0@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <230a5b34-d23e-8318-0b1f-d23ada7318e0@redhat.com> From: Naresh Kamboju Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2019 19:35:13 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.2 000/413] 5.2.3-stable review To: Paolo Bonzini Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman , Anders Roxell , Ben Hutchings , wanpengli@tencent.com, Linus Torvalds , patches@kernelci.org, sean.j.christopherson@intel.com, Linux Kernel Mailing List , lkft-triage@lists.linaro.org, linux- stable , Andrew Morton , Shuah Khan , Guenter Roeck , jmattson@google.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: stable-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org Paolo, On Thu, 25 Jul 2019 at 19:17, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > On 25/07/19 13:34, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > Any chance you can run 'git bisect' to find the offending patch? Or > > just try reverting a few, you can ignore the ppc ones, so that only > > leaves you 7 different commits. > > > > Does this same test pass in 5.3-rc1? Yes. same test pass on 5.3-rc1 kvm unit test always fetching master branch and at tip runs the latest test code on all branches mainline 5.3-rc1 and stable-rc-5.2 branch > > Anders, are you running the same kvm-unit-tests commit that passed for > 5.2.2? My suspicion is that your previous test didn't have this commit No. I see two extra test code commits for 5.2.3 Re-tested 5.2.2 with tip of kvm unit tests sources and vmx test FAILED [1]. Greg, This investigation confirms it is a new test code failure on stable-rc 5.2.3 > since the symptoms match and the corresponding fix was made in 5.3. Thanks for your findings. > Paolo - Naresh [1] https://lkft.validation.linaro.org/scheduler/job/837811