Re: [PATCH 1/3] kci-gitlab: Introducing GitLab-CI Pipeline for Kernel Testing

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

Hi Maxime,

On Mon, Mar 4, 2024 at 10:15 AM Maxime Ripard <mripard@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 04, 2024 at 09:12:38AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 3, 2024 at 10:30 AM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > On Sun, Mar 3, 2024 at 3:30 AM Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > On 3/2/24 14:10, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > > > > While checkpatch is indeed of arguable value, I think it would help a
> > > > > lot not having to bother about the persistent _build_ failures on
> > > > > 32-bit systems. You mentioned the fancy drm CI system above, but they
> > > > > don't run tests and not even test builds on 32-bit targets, which has
> > > > > repeatedly caused (and currently does cause) build failures in drm
> > > > > code when trying to build, say, arm:allmodconfig in linux-next. Most
> > > > > trivial build failures in linux-next (and, yes, sometimes mainline)
> > > > > could be prevented with a simple generic CI.
> > > >
> > > > Yes, definitely. Thanks for bringing that up.
> > >
> > > +1
> >
> > > Kisskb can send out email when builds get broken, and when they get
> > > fixed again.  I receive such emails for the m68k builds.
> >
> > Like this (yes, one more in DRM; sometimes I wonder if DRM is meant only
> > for 64-bit little-endian platforms with +200 GiB/s memory bandwidth):
> >
> > ---8<-------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Subject: kisskb: FAILED linux-next/m68k-allmodconfig/m68k-gcc8 Mon Mar 04, 06:35
> > To: geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Date: Mon, 04 Mar 2024 08:05:14 -0000
> >
> > FAILED linux-next/m68k-allmodconfig/m68k-gcc8 Mon Mar 04, 06:35
> >
> > http://kisskb.ellerman.id.au/kisskb/buildresult/15135537/
> >
> > Commit:   Add linux-next specific files for 20240304
> >           67908bf6954b7635d33760ff6dfc189fc26ccc89
> > Compiler: m68k-linux-gcc (GCC) 8.5.0 / GNU ld (GNU Binutils) 2.36.1
> >
> > Possible errors
> > ---------------
> >
> > ERROR: modpost: "__udivdi3" [drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i-drm-hdmi.ko] undefined!
> > make[3]: *** [scripts/Makefile.modpost:145: Module.symvers] Error 1
> > make[2]: *** [Makefile:1871: modpost] Error 2
> > make[1]: *** [Makefile:240: __sub-make] Error 2
> > make: *** [Makefile:240: __sub-make] Error 2
> >
> > No warnings found in log.
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------->8---
>
> The driver is meant for a controller featured in an SoC with a Cortex-A8
> ARM CPU and less than a GiB/s memory bandwidth.

Good, so the hardware cannot possibly need 64-bit pixel clock values ;-)

BTW, doesn't the build fail on arm32, too?


> And I just sent a fix for that one, thanks for the report.

Thanks!

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

-- 
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68korg

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds