Re: next/master bisection: baseline.login on rk3288-rock2-square

[Guillaume Tucker]

On 04/02/2021 15:42, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Feb 2021 at 12:32, Guillaume Tucker
> <guillaume.tucker@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> On 04/02/2021 10:33, Guillaume Tucker wrote:
>>> On 04/02/2021 10:27, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 4 Feb 2021 at 11:06, Russell King - ARM Linux admin
>>>> <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 10:07:58AM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, 4 Feb 2021 at 09:43, Guillaume Tucker
>>>>>> <guillaume.tucker@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Ard,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please see the bisection report below about a boot failure on
>>>>>>> rk3288 with next-20210203.  It was also bisected on
>>>>>>> imx6q-var-dt6customboard with next-20210202.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Reports aren't automatically sent to the public while we're
>>>>>>> trialing new bisection features on kernelci.org but this one
>>>>>>> looks valid.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The kernel is most likely crashing very early on, so there's
>>>>>>> nothing in the logs.  Please let us know if you need some help
>>>>>>> with debugging or trying a fix on these platforms.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks for the report.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ard,
>>>>>
>>>>> I want to send my fixes branch today which includes your regression
>>>>> fix that caused this regression.
>>>>>
>>>>> As this is proving difficult to fix, I can only drop your fix from
>>>>> my fixes branch - and given that this seems to be problematical, I'm
>>>>> tempted to revert the original change at this point which should fix
>>>>> both of these regressions - and then we have another go at getting rid
>>>>> of the set/way instructions during the next cycle.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi Russell,
>>>>
>>>> If Guillaume is willing to do the experiment, and it fixes the issue,
>>>
>>> Yes, I'm running some tests with that fix now and should have
>>> some results shortly.
>>
>> Yes it does fix the issue:
>>
>>   https://lava.collabora.co.uk/scheduler/job/3173819
>>
>> with Ard's fix applied to this test branch:
>>
>>   https://gitlab.collabora.com/gtucker/linux/-/commits/next-20210203-ard-fix/
>>
>>
>> +clang +Nick
>>
>> It's worth mentioning that the issue only happens with kernels
>> built with Clang.  As you can see there are several other arm
>> platforms failing with clang-11 builds but booting fine with
>> gcc-8:
>>
>>   https://kernelci.org/test/job/next/branch/master/kernel/next-20210203/plan/baseline/
>>
>> Here's a sample build log:
>>
>>   https://storage.staging.kernelci.org/gtucker/next-20210203-ard-fix/v5.10-rc4-24722-g58b6c0e507b7-gtucker_single-staging-33/arm/multi_v7_defconfig/clang-11/build.log
>>
>> Essentially:
>>
>>   make -j18 ARCH=arm CROSS_COMPILE=arm-linux-gnueabihf- LLVM=1 CC="ccache clang" zImage
>>
>> I believe it should be using the GNU assembler as LLVM_IAS=1 is
>> not defined, but there may be something more subtle about it.
>>
> 
> 
> Do you have a link for a failing zImage built from multi_v7_defconfig?

Sure, this one was built from a plain next-20210203:

  http://storage.staging.kernelci.org/gtucker/next-20210203-ard-fix/v5.10-rc4-24722-g58b6c0e507b7-gtucker_single-staging-33/arm/multi_v7_defconfig/clang-11/zImage

You can also find the dtbs, modules and other things in that same
directory.

For the record, here's the test job that used it:

  https://lava.collabora.co.uk/scheduler/job/3173792

Guillaume