On Fri, 23 Aug 2019, David Abdurachmanov wrote: > 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. OK. > 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? 0day runs the kselftests, and at least on some architectures/Kconfigs, it's succeeding: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190726083740.GG22106@shao2-debian/ https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190712064850.GC20848@shao2-debian/ https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190311074115.GC10839@shao2-debian/ etc. - Paul
