Received-SPF: softfail (google.com: domain of transitioning linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org does not designate 23.128.96.19 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.19;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CA+G9fYtk6rpp=0WG9LyfQRCsMbbvf=P7uhMuon4RzZz3UjYVYQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <YkQOoQRUKemBEn02@kroah.com> <CA+G9fYuK2GDqWHuW3oOi2O0h4RWsLLQb9198i-PS=nMf1t0T7w@mail.gmail.com>
 <YkQT0ROhctplAuds@kroah.com>
In-Reply-To: <YkQT0ROhctplAuds@kroah.com>
From:   Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@linaro.org>
Date:   Wed, 30 Mar 2022 19:24:50 +0530
Message-ID: <CA+G9fYv9uNrUTv2TQfV6yW98qQBxhJ9Fg6UwHLJKYbPHEGHFtA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: mainline: qemu_arm64 boot failed - Failed to start Hostname
 Service - Stopped Serial Getty on ttyAMA0
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc:     open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        lkft-triage@lists.linaro.org, regressions@lists.linux.dev,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@kernel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@canonical.com>,
        Vincent Whitchurch <vincent.whitchurch@axis.com>,
        Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 at 13:54, Greg Kroah-Hartman
<gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> > > That's a lot of userspace logs, any kernel logs showing that anything
> > > failed?
> >
> > I do not see kernel logs failures here.
>
> Great, then the kernel is working just fine!  :)
>
> Seriously, without some sort of hint, it's going to be impossible for us
> to know what to do here...

Ander is bisecting this problem.

OTOH, I am looking into test history and found the head commit is booting pass.
The problem report I have sent is a head-1 test report.

This means that, current Linus master boot pass.

Do you see any relation of top fix commit vs the report I sent.

BAD: 965181d7ef7e (head -1 )
GOOD: d888c83fcec75194a8 ( head)

git log 965181d7ef7e..d888c83fcec75194a8

commit d888c83fcec75194a8a48ccd283953bdba7b2550 (HEAD -> linux-master,
linux/master)
Author: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Date:   Tue Mar 29 23:29:18 2022 -0700

    fs: fix fd table size alignment properly

    Jason Donenfeld reports that my commit 1c24a186398f ("fs: fd tables have
    to be multiples of BITS_PER_LONG") doesn't work, and the reason is an
    embarrassing brown-paper-bag bug.

    Yes, we want to align the number of fds to BITS_PER_LONG, and yes, the
    reason they might not be aligned is because the incoming 'max_fd'
    argument might not be aligned.

    But aligining the argument - while simple - will cause a "infinitely
    big" maxfd (eg NR_OPEN_MAX) to just overflow to zero.  Which most
    definitely isn't what we want either.

    The obvious fix was always just to do the alignment last, but I had
    moved it earlier just to make the patch smaller and the code look
    simpler.  Duh.  It certainly made _me_ look simple.

    Fixes: 1c24a186398f ("fs: fd tables have to be multiples of BITS_PER_LONG")
    Reported-and-tested-by: Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@zx2c4.com>
    Cc: Fedor Pchelkin <aissur0002@gmail.com>
    Cc: Alexey Khoroshilov <khoroshilov@ispras.ru>
    Cc: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>
    Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>

- Naresh