> -----Original Message----- > From: Rafael Tinoco [mailto:rafael.tinoco@xxxxxxxxxx] > > Thank you Daniel! Will investigate those. OK, thank you :). Notice that I did those tests on x86_64. It seems you are testing on arm, so there may be some differences. I just checked these tests on 4.4.133 (on x86_64): fcntl35: PASS fcntl35_64: PASS select04: PASS I am currently investigating other tests that are failing as well. They are not regressions, just some patches have not been backported yet. Thanks, Daniel > > Meanwhile, Greg, I referred to: > > time: Fix CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW sub-nanosecond accounting > > Since we're not using this type of clock on arm64's 4.4 kernel vdso > functions. This commit's description calls attention for it to be > responsible for fixing kselftest flacking tests, we wouldn't get that > on 4.4 according to bellow: > > stable-rc-linux-4.14.y > dbb236c1ceb6 arm64/vdso: Fix nsec handling for CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW > 49eea433b326 arm64: Add support for CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW in > clock_gettime() vDSO > 82e88ff1ea94 hrtimer: Revert CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW support > 9c808765e88e hrtimer: Add support for CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW > > stable-rc-linux-4.16.y > dbb236c1ceb6 arm64/vdso: Fix nsec handling for CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW > 49eea433b326 arm64: Add support for CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW in > clock_gettime() vDSO > 82e88ff1ea94 hrtimer: Revert CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW support > 9c808765e88e hrtimer: Add support for CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW > > stable-rc-linux-4.4.y > <none> > > stable-rc-linux-4.9.y > 99f66b5182a4 arm64/vdso: Fix nsec handling for CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW > 49eea433b326 arm64: Add support for CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW in > clock_gettime() vDSO > 82e88ff1ea94 hrtimer: Revert CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW support > 9c808765e88e hrtimer: Add support for CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW > > Yet, the second fix was backported to all (including 4.4.y): > > stable-rc-linux-4.14.y > 3d88d56c5873 time: Fix CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW sub-nanosecond accounting > stable-rc-linux-4.16.y > 3d88d56c5873 time: Fix CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW sub-nanosecond accounting > stable-rc-linux-4.4.y > 7c8bd6e07430 time: Fix CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW sub-nanosecond accounting > stable-rc-linux-4.9.y > a53bfdda06ac time: Fix CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW sub-nanosecond accounting > > Not sure you want to keep it in 4.4, thought it was worth mentioning it. > > Cheers. > > On 24 May 2018 at 22:34, Daniel Sangorrin > <daniel.sangorrin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hello Rafael, > > > > The tests fcntl35 and fcntl35_64 should have go from FAIL to PASS. > > https://www.spinics.net/lists/stable/msg239475.html > > > > Looking at > > > https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-stable-rc-4.4-oe/build/v4.4.132-93-g915a > 3d7cdea9/testrun/228569/suite/ltp-syscalls-tests/tests/ > > I see that these two tests (and other important tests as well) are being SKIPPED. > > > > By the way, I see that select04 FAILS in your case. But in my setup, select04 was > working fine (x86_64) in 4.4.132. I will confirm that it still works in 4.4.133 > > > > Thanks, > > Daniel Sangorrin > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: stable-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:stable-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > On > >> Behalf Of Rafael Tinoco > >> Sent: Friday, May 25, 2018 5:32 AM > >> To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> Cc: linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; shuah@xxxxxxxxxx; patches@xxxxxxxxxxxx; > >> lkft-triage@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; ben.hutchings@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > >> stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > >> torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx > >> Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/92] 4.4.133-stable review > >> > >> > > kernel: 4.4.133-rc1 > >> > > git repo: > >> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git > >> > > git branch: linux-4.4.y > >> > > git commit: 915a3d7cdea9daa9e9fb6b855f10c1312e6910c4 > >> > > git describe: v4.4.132-93-g915a3d7cdea9 > >> > > Test details: > >> > https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-stable-rc-4.4-oe/build/v4.4.132-93-g915a > >> 3d7cdea9 > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > No regressions (compared to build v4.4.132-71-g180635995c36) > >> > > >> > It should have gotten better, as there was a fix in here for at least 2 > >> > LTP tests that we previously were not passing. I don't know why you all > >> > were not reporting that in the past, it took someone else randomly > >> > deciding to run LTP to report it to me... > >> > > >> > Why did an improvement in results not show up? > >> > >> Are you referring to the CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW fix for the arm64 vDSO ? > >> I think that CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW in VDSO wasn't backported to 4.4.y > >> (commit 49eea433b326 in mainline) so this "fix" is changing the > >> timekeeping sauce (that would fix MONOTONIC RAW) but not for 4.4.y in > >> ARM64. Needs review though :\ > > > > > >
