Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-97914-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:4601:e00::3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:4601:e00::3;
Message-ID: <b888cbe2-6071-4445-91cd-8ce7cc9cc8f4@leemhuis.info>
Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2024 15:06:38 +0100
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: Probe regression of efuse@11f10000 on
 mt8183-kukui-jacuzzi-juniper-sku16 running next-20240202
Content-Language: en-US, de-DE
To: =?UTF-8?B?TsOtY29sYXMgRi4gUi4gQS4gUHJhZG8=?= <nfraprado@collabora.com>,
 AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com>,
 Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>,
 Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org>,
 Chen-Yu Tsai <wenst@chromium.org>
Cc: regressions@lists.linux.dev, linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org,
 linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
 kernel@collabora.com
References: <47cdeac1-121d-4b1a-a3ac-e2affc7a2fc3@notapiano>
 <c4416256-eedc-4c9b-b968-3a02490c4c09@notapiano>
From: Thorsten Leemhuis <regressions@leemhuis.info>
In-Reply-To: <c4416256-eedc-4c9b-b968-3a02490c4c09@notapiano>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

On 08.03.24 15:31, Nícolas F. R. A. Prado wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 06, 2024 at 11:11:00AM -0500, Nícolas F. R. A. Prado wrote:
>>
>> KernelCI has identified a regression [1] on the
>> mt8183-kukui-jacuzzi-juniper-sku16 machine running on next-20240202 compared to
>> next-20240118:
>>
>> #regzbot introduced next-20240118..next-20240202
> 
> Not sure why this got filed by regzbot under the mainline tab rather than next.
> Maybe it was the missing collon? 

No, I guess that is a bug in regzbot: the support for -next is there,
but not much tested. Will need to take a closer look, will do so in the
next few days.

> In any case, the fix has already made it to linux-next, so this should close the
> regression:
>
> #regzbot fix: nvmem: mtk-efuse: Drop NVMEM device name

Out of interest: Is involving regzbot worth it in case the fix is
already in -next? Or is that primarily to keep track of "we found a
regression and a fix was already available in next". I don't mind if
it's the latter, just curious.

Ciao, Thorsten