Hi Basil, I’ve not encountered this, but I’m not sure how many people use boot_linaro_kernel.
Tyler: Do you use boot_linaro_kernel on fastmodels from kernel-ci? If so, have you seen this problem? Dave > On 7 Oct 2015, at 13:27, Basil Eljuse <basil.elj...@arm.com> wrote: > > Hello All, > > Before I report this as a bug thought to check if this is a known issue or > not. Do confirm. > > We were trying to use lava-test-shell in running pm-qa on AEMv8 and > CortexA57xA53 model variants. > > Based on what we have run we could see that if we use boot_linaro_image as > the image deployment mode, there are no issues, LAVA is able to run the > lava-test-shell successfully. > > However when we use boot_linaro_kernel as the image deployment mode, we see > lava-test-shell fails due to network being reported as ‘down’. > > Is this something known already? Or should I raise a bug report? > > > Details:: > > deploy_linaro_image – > > Attaching the exact test def for reference. > > Here we use the hwpack and a modified rootfs (added test suite in it) and > then uses boot_linaro_image and provides some uefi boot commands through > ‘boot_cmds’ and override some model flags using the ‘options’ parameter. > > deploy_linaro_kernel – > > Attaching the exact test def for reference > > Here we use ‘boot_image’ with commands through boot_cmds and model flags > using ‘sim_options’ parameter. > > > In the sim options even if we give > > "-C bp.hostbridge.interfaceName=anything", > "-C bp.smsc_91c111.enabled=true", > "-C bp.smsc_91c111.mac_address=00:11:22:33:44:53" > > It don’t seem to get networking setup correctly. > > We could see the initial boot successful and as part of doing the > lava-test-shell execution, the pre-requisite of network being up fails! > > Section 70 > <http://ssg-sw.cambridge.arm.com/lava/scheduler/job/4541/log_file#L_70> > 70.0 > <http://ssg-sw.cambridge.arm.com/lava/scheduler/job/4541/log_file#L_70_0> > linaro-test [rc=0]# <LAVA_DISPATCHER>2015-10-06 03:26:22 PM DEBUG: send > (delay_ms=0): cd /tmp 70.1 > <http://ssg-sw.cambridge.arm.com/lava/scheduler/job/4541/log_file#L_70_1> > <LAVA_DISPATCHER>2015-10-06 03:26:22 PM DEBUG: send (delay_ms=0): > Section 71 > <http://ssg-sw.cambridge.arm.com/lava/scheduler/job/4541/log_file#L_71> > 71.0 <http://ssg-sw.cambridge.arm.com/lava/scheduler/job/4541/log_file#L_71_0> > Section 72 > <http://ssg-sw.cambridge.arm.com/lava/scheduler/job/4541/log_file#L_72> > 72.0 > <http://ssg-sw.cambridge.arm.com/lava/scheduler/job/4541/log_file#L_72_0> > <LAVA_DISPATCHER>2015-10-06 03:26:22 PM DEBUG: expect (600): 'linaro-test > \[rc=(\d+)\]# ' > Section 73 > <http://ssg-sw.cambridge.arm.com/lava/scheduler/job/4541/log_file#L_73> > 73.0 > <http://ssg-sw.cambridge.arm.com/lava/scheduler/job/4541/log_file#L_73_0> cd > /tmp > Section 74 > <http://ssg-sw.cambridge.arm.com/lava/scheduler/job/4541/log_file#L_74> > 74.0 > <http://ssg-sw.cambridge.arm.com/lava/scheduler/job/4541/log_file#L_74_0> > linaro-test [rc=0]# <LAVA_DISPATCHER>2015-10-06 03:26:23 PM INFO: Waiting for > network to come up 74.1 > <http://ssg-sw.cambridge.arm.com/lava/scheduler/job/4541/log_file#L_74_1> > <LAVA_DISPATCHER>2015-10-06 03:26:23 PM DEBUG: send (delay_ms=0): LC_ALL=C > ping -W4 -c1 10.1.99.203 74.2 > <http://ssg-sw.cambridge.arm.com/lava/scheduler/job/4541/log_file#L_74_2> > <LAVA_DISPATCHER>2015-10-06 03:26:24 PM DEBUG: send (delay_ms=0): > Section 75 > <http://ssg-sw.cambridge.arm.com/lava/scheduler/job/4541/log_file#L_75> > 75.0 <http://ssg-sw.cambridge.arm.com/lava/scheduler/job/4541/log_file#L_75_0> > Section 76 > <http://ssg-sw.cambridge.arm.com/lava/scheduler/job/4541/log_file#L_76> > 76.0 > <http://ssg-sw.cambridge.arm.com/lava/scheduler/job/4541/log_file#L_76_0> > <LAVA_DISPATCHER>2015-10-06 03:26:24 PM DEBUG: expect (60): '['1 received|1 > packets received', '0 received|0 packets received', 'Network is unreachable']' > Section 77 > <http://ssg-sw.cambridge.arm.com/lava/scheduler/job/4541/log_file#L_77> > 77.0 > <http://ssg-sw.cambridge.arm.com/lava/scheduler/job/4541/log_file#L_77_0> > LC_ALL=C ping -W4 -c1 10.1.99.203 77.1 > <http://ssg-sw.cambridge.arm.com/lava/scheduler/job/4541/log_file#L_77_1> > PING 10.1.99.203 (10.1.99.203): 56 data bytes 77.2 > <http://ssg-sw.cambridge.arm.com/lava/scheduler/job/4541/log_file#L_77_2> > ping: sendto: Network is unreachable > > Note: Attaching only the test definitions in the email, let me know if full > logs from the successful and failed runs needs to be shared, or I do that via > big report if it is confirmed so. > > > Thanks > Basil Eljuse… > > > -- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are > confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended > recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the > contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the > information in any medium. Thank you. > > ARM Limited, Registered office 110 Fulbourn Road, Cambridge CB1 9NJ, > Registered in England & Wales, Company No: 2557590 > ARM Holdings plc, Registered office 110 Fulbourn Road, Cambridge CB1 9NJ, > Registered in England & Wales, Company No: 2548782 > <job_cortex_SUCCESS.json><job_cortex_FAILURE.json>_______________________________________________ > linaro-validation mailing list > linaro-validation@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-validation@lists.linaro.org> > https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-validation > <https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-validation>
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ linaro-validation mailing list linaro-validation@lists.linaro.org https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-validation
