Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 23 Mar 2022 07:23:56 -0700 | From | Guenter Roeck <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v1] random: block in /dev/urandom |
| |
On 3/23/22 05:10, Mark Brown wrote: > On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 02:54:20PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: >> On 3/22/22 11:24, Mark Brown wrote: > >>> Just as a datapoint for debugging at least qemu/arm is getting coverage >>> in CI systems (KernelCI is covering a bunch of different emulated >>> machines and LKFT has at least one configuration as well, clang's tests >>> have some wider architecture coverage as well I think) and they don't >>> seem to be seeing any problems - there's some other variable in there. > >> I use buildroot 2021.02.3. I have not changed the buildroot code, and it >> still seems to be the same in 2022.02. I don't see the problem with all >> boot tests, only with the architectures mentioned above, and not with all >> qemu machines on the affected platforms. For arm, mostly older machines >> are affected (versatile, realview, pxa configurations, collie, integratorcp, >> sx1, mps2-an385, vexpress-a9, cubieboard). I didn't check, but maybe >> kernelci doesn't test those machines ? > > Kind of academic given that Jason seems to have a handle on what the > issues are but for KernelCI it's variations on mach-virt, plus > versatile-pb. There's a physical cubietruck as well, and BeagleBone > Blacks among others. My best guess would be systems with low RAM are > somehow more prone to issues.
I don't think it is entirely academic. versatile-pb fails for me; if it doesn't fail at KernelCI, I'd like to understand why - not to fix it in my test environment, but to make sure that I _don't_ fix it. After all, it _is_ a regression. Even if that regression is triggered by bad (for a given definition of "bad") userspace code, it is still a regression.
Thanks, Guenter
| |