On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 5:30 PM Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, 22 Aug 2019, David Abdurachmanov wrote: > > > There is one failing kernel selftest: global.user_notification_signal > > Is this the only failing test? Or are the rest of the selftests skipped > when this test fails, and no further tests are run, as seems to be shown > here: > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/CADnnUqcmDMRe1f+3jG8SPR6jRrnBsY8VVD70VbKEm0NqYeoicA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ Yes, it's a single test failing. After removing global.user_notification_signal test everything else pass and you get the results printed. > > For example, looking at the source, I'd naively expect to see the > user_notification_closed_listener test result -- which follows right > after the failing test in the selftest source. But there aren't any > results? Yes, it hangs at this point. You have to manually terminate it. > > Also - could you follow up with the author of this failing test to see if > we can get some more clarity about what might be going wrong here? It > appears that the failing test was added in commit 6a21cc50f0c7f ("seccomp: > add a return code to trap to userspace") by Tycho Andersen > <tycho@xxxxxxxx>. Well the code states ".. and hope that it doesn't break when there is actually a signal :)". Maybe we are just unlucky. I don't have results from other architectures to compare. I found that Linaro is running selftests, but SECCOMP is disabled and thus it's failing. Is there another CI which tracks selftests? https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-next-oe/tests/kselftest/seccomp_seccomp_bpf?top=next-20190823 > > > - Paul
