Ok, that works. I should be able to provide basic validation much more easily.
We are having trouble reproducing the crash with the unpatched kernel, as we've put many remediating workarounds in place and it's been an adventure to remember where they all are and how exactly they all interacted (and also there are some other bugs currently being worked on in our test environment that affect our ability to reproduce as well). We know it will crash though, and as soon as we get the test setup in place to reproduce the crash I'm confident we can repeat it every time and get a good validation that the patch is solving our problem as well. If we still can't reproduce the crash by COB Monday, I'll switch gears to provide just a basic boot/function validation and will make sure I get that to you by Tuesday at the latest. We only have the environment to test xenial ppc64el. We have xenial and trusty x86_64, but not with bnx2x. We don't have artful anywhere that I can test with. Based on that, I was only planning to provide a report for xenial ppc64el. Does the smoke testing make sense to perform without bnx2x hardware present? -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1715519 Title: bnx2x_attn_int_deasserted3:4323 MC assert! To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1715519/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
