On Wed, Jun 07, 2023 at 11:22:54PM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote: > On Wed, Jun 07, 2023 at 02:03:17PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > (There were some kernel test > > > > robot complaints as well, valid or not I am not sure.) > > > > > > You mean in relation with nolibc stuff (or nolibc-test) or something > > > totally different ? > > > > Apologies, this was me being confused and failing to look closely. > > > > The complaints were not about nolibc, but rather about my patches that > > they were on top of. Not your problem! > > Ah no problem :-) > > > And please let me know when the next batch from your tree are ready to go. > > (You might have been saying that they were in your recent emails, but > > I thought I should double-check.) > > No pb, I just sent it while you were writing and our emails have crossed :-) > > In short, it's ready now with branch 20230606-nolibc-rv32+stkp7a but if you > need any more info (more detailed summary, a public repost of the whole > series etc), just let me know. And I faced 2 kernel build errors on s390x > and riscv about rcu_task something, though you might be interested :-/ And I pulled them in and got this from "make run": 138 test(s) passed, 0 skipped, 0 failed.[ 2.416045] reboot: Power down And this from "make run-user": 136 test(s) passed, 2 skipped, 0 failed. See all results in /home/git/linux-rcu/tools/testing/selftests/nolibc/run.out And run.out looks as it has before, so all looks good at this end. Thus, unless you tell me otherwise, I will move these to my nolibc branch for the upcoming merge window. Thanx, Paul
