Re: ❌ FAIL: Test report for kernel 5.5.0-rc6-b260f5e.cki?(arm-next)

From: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
To: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Veronika Kabatova <vkabatov@redhat.com>
Cc: Jianwen Ji <jiji@redhat.com>, Hangbin Liu <haliu@redhat.com>,
	catalin marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Yi Chen <yiche@redhat.com>, CKI Project <cki-project@redhat.com>,
	Xiumei Mu <xmu@redhat.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: ❌ FAIL: Test report for kernel 5.5.0-rc6-b260f5e.cki?(arm-next)
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2020 10:57:49 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <584b0c2e-bdc8-791f-cbc1-c27f3d6ed53d@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200117103413.GA6144@willie-the-truck>

On 2020-01-17 10:34 am, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 05:24:17AM -0500, Veronika Kabatova wrote:
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "CKI Project" <cki-project@redhat.com>
>>> To: will@kernel.org, "catalin marinas" <catalin.marinas@arm.com>, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
>>> Cc: "Yi Chen" <yiche@redhat.com>, "Jianwen Ji" <jiji@redhat.com>, "Hangbin Liu" <haliu@redhat.com>, "Xiumei Mu"
>>> <xmu@redhat.com>
>>> Sent: Friday, January 17, 2020 4:35:27 AM
>>> Subject: ❌ FAIL: Test report for kernel 5.5.0-rc6-b260f5e.cki	(arm-next)
>>>
>>> We ran automated tests on a recent commit from this kernel tree:
>>>
>>>         Kernel repo:
>>>         git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/arm64/linux.git
>>>              Commit: b260f5eb4e57 - Merge branch 'for-next/core' into
>>>              for-kernelci
>>>
>>> The results of these automated tests are provided below.
>>>
>>>      Overall result: FAILED (see details below)
>>>               Merge: OK
>>>             Compile: OK
>>>               Tests: FAILED
>>>
>>> All kernel binaries, config files, and logs are available for download here:
>>>
>>>    https://artifacts.cki-project.org/pipelines/387219
>>>
>>> One or more kernel tests failed:
>>>
>>>      aarch64:
>>>       ❌ Networking UDP: socket
>>>       ❌ Networking ipsec: basic netns tunnel
>>>
>>
>> after yesterday's discussions I thought I'd point it out specifically.
>> These tests did really report a failure and the results are not caused
>> by the infra issue we were talking about. I'm sure the test maintainers
>> can help with figuring out if this is something to be concerned with.
> 
> Thanks, Veronika -- I was about to mail you to ask! We queued some IP
> checksum changes yesterday, so I bet they're the culprit, since this looks
> to be related to UDP checksumming.

Urgh... let me see if I can reproduce something locally - I had iperf3 
running fine in both directions with tx/rx offload disabled, and my 
userspace tests were showing the new routine produce the same sum as the 
generic version for the same buffer, so I wouldn't have expected UDP to 
behave any differently, but I'll dig in and double-check everything...

Thanks,
Robin.

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel