From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bjorn Andersson Subject: Re: next/master boot: 179 boots: 11 failed, 167 passed with 1 offline (next-20180731) Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2018 13:50:27 -0700 Message-ID: <20180801205027.GC24465@builder> References: <5b607cc4.1c69fb81.6c1d6.6534@mx.google.com> <20180731161114.GI5719@sirena.org.uk> <20180731195037.GA6737@centauri.lan> <20180801093102.GB5509@sirena.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180801093102.GB5509@sirena.org.uk> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=m.gmane.org@lists.infradead.org To: Mark Brown Cc: David Brown , kernel-build-reports@lists.linaro.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, Andy Gross , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, Niklas Cassel , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org On Wed 01 Aug 02:31 PDT 2018, Mark Brown wrote: > On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 09:50:37PM +0200, Niklas Cassel wrote: > > > I guess it could be a bug that does not trigger on every boot, > > or it could be a problem in the kernelci infrastructure. > > Infrastructure bugs *tend* to manifest differently to this FWIW, though > it can never be excluded. No, that's not an infrastructure issue. The board did warn about not finding the ath10k firmware, which is always does, so that's not the issue - in itself. Then nothing happened for 266 seconds, so my lab decided to terminate the agony. So this is either an issue with the stability of next-20180731 or with the specific board. PS. Today's next did boot successfully on the board. Regards, Bjorn From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: bjorn.andersson@linaro.org (Bjorn Andersson) Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2018 13:50:27 -0700 Subject: next/master boot: 179 boots: 11 failed, 167 passed with 1 offline (next-20180731) In-Reply-To: <20180801093102.GB5509@sirena.org.uk> References: <5b607cc4.1c69fb81.6c1d6.6534@mx.google.com> <20180731161114.GI5719@sirena.org.uk> <20180731195037.GA6737@centauri.lan> <20180801093102.GB5509@sirena.org.uk> Message-ID: <20180801205027.GC24465@builder> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Wed 01 Aug 02:31 PDT 2018, Mark Brown wrote: > On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 09:50:37PM +0200, Niklas Cassel wrote: > > > I guess it could be a bug that does not trigger on every boot, > > or it could be a problem in the kernelci infrastructure. > > Infrastructure bugs *tend* to manifest differently to this FWIW, though > it can never be excluded. No, that's not an infrastructure issue. The board did warn about not finding the ath10k firmware, which is always does, so that's not the issue - in itself. Then nothing happened for 266 seconds, so my lab decided to terminate the agony. So this is either an issue with the stability of next-20180731 or with the specific board. PS. Today's next did boot successfully on the board. Regards, Bjorn