Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-90998-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.80.249 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.80.249;
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20240228225527.1052240-1-helen.koike@collabora.com>
 <20240228225527.1052240-2-helen.koike@collabora.com> <20240229-dancing-laughing-groundhog-d85161@houat>
 <5d7ed81b-37f9-48e9-ab7e-484b74ca886c@gmail.com> <CAHk-=wixVy3WYvjbt43ZSrCqPDsS76QJQSkXFbbPsAOs1MCSAQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABXOdTeT2ip1uS2EG2w8pW7254Tnd=ZDNz-KC61-G-yqDTVgJA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20240304-rigorous-silkworm-of-awe-4eee8f@houat> <CABXOdTc4MXcjwgGuJb4_69-4OFELD37x0B6oMr=4z=nxZ2HPXQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20240304-ludicrous-grinning-goldfish-090aac@houat> <CABXOdTeDydWO9mf2yxWjjebHZ1bE=R2HPs1P4XYwNhzznNKxmw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20240304-benevolent-brawny-urchin-0af0ad@houat>
In-Reply-To: <20240304-benevolent-brawny-urchin-0af0ad@houat>
From: Guenter Roeck <groeck@google.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2024 09:22:59 -0800
Message-ID: <CABXOdTeza3ZJRO7eexp8evm8o1B81fw9cDQbE_nHwqhufMCfGA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] kci-gitlab: Introducing GitLab-CI Pipeline for Kernel Testing
To: Maxime Ripard <mripard@kernel.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linuxfoundation.org>, Nikolai Kondrashov <spbnick@gmail.com>, 
	Helen Koike <helen.koike@collabora.com>, linuxtv-ci@linuxtv.org, 
	dave.pigott@collabora.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, 
	dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, 
	gustavo.padovan@collabora.com, pawiecz@collabora.com, 
	tales.aparecida@gmail.com, workflows@vger.kernel.org, 
	kernelci@lists.linux.dev, skhan@linuxfoundation.org, 
	kunit-dev@googlegroups.com, nfraprado@collabora.com, davidgow@google.com, 
	cocci@inria.fr, Julia.Lawall@inria.fr, laura.nao@collabora.com, 
	ricardo.canuelo@collabora.com, kernel@collabora.com, 
	gregkh@linuxfoundation.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, Mar 4, 2024 at 9:09=E2=80=AFAM Maxime Ripard <mripard@kernel.org> w=
rote:

> And singling out DRM because it regularly allegedly breaks things on
> xtensa or m68k and claiming we're not taking CI seriously because of it
> is completely ridiculous. If the all the subsystems were taking CI as
> seriously as DRM, we would be in a much better place.
>

The failure I reported as an example was on arm, not on xtensa or m68k
I'll disable CONFIG_DRM in my build tests for xtensa and m68k going
forward.

Thanks,
Guenter