On 7/25/24 9:55 PM, Oliver Sang wrote: > hi, Alex, > > On Tue, Jul 23, 2024 at 04:23:00PM +0800, Alex Shi wrote: >> >> >> On 7/23/24 11:22 AM, Oliver Sang wrote: >>> hi, Alex, >>> >>> On Tue, Jul 23, 2024 at 09:58:25AM +0800, Alex Shi wrote: >>>> >>>> On 7/23/24 9:05 AM, kernel test robot wrote: >>>>> hi, Alex Shi, >>>>> >>>>> we noticed there is a mmunstable3 branch now, but there is no same title patch >>>>> there. not sure if this report is still useful, below report just FYI. >>>> Hi Oliver, >>>> >>>> Thanks a lot for your testing and founding on my unreleased code branch! >>>> The problem should be resolved on my latest code yesterday. >>>> But multiple archs maybe still are fragile in the branch. Are there bootable in virtual machine, like arm, s390, etc? >>> we did boot test in vm, but only for x86_64 or i386. >>> >>> you may notice we also send another report >>> "[alexshi:mmunstable3] [mm/memory] f6ba7ce983: kernel_BUG_at_mm/page_alloc.c" >> >> this problem was fixed too. Anyway thanks a lot notice me of this. > > thanks a lot for information! just was wondering which branch contains the fixes? > > I ask this because we still have some bisect results pointing the commits in > mmunstable > mmunstable2 > mmunstable3 > branches in https://github.com/alexshi/linux.git > > are they still useful? if they are out-of-date branches, we won't send reports > to you upon them. thanks Hi Olive, Sorry for response late, I have some issue to deal with lately. The mmunstable2/3 are removed a couple days ago. Thanks again for your great job! Alex > >> >>> >>> for both commit, we made some further check and cofirmed they cannot boot >>> successfully on both vm/bm, again, we only test x86_64/i386 for now. >> >> Thanks a lot for the info! >> >> Alex
