From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1751324AbeAYNgJ (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Thu, 25 Jan 2018 08:36:09 -0500
Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:45394 "EHLO mx2.suse.de"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1751011AbeAYNgI (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Thu, 25 Jan 2018 08:36:08 -0500
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2018 14:35:51 +0100
From: Cyril Hrubis <chrubis@suse.cz>
To: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>
Cc: kernel test robot <xiaolong.ye@intel.com>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
        Luca Abeni <luca.abeni@santannapisa.it>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Claudio Scordino <claudio@evidence.eu.com>, lkp@01.org,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, ltp@lists.linux.it
Subject: Re: [LTP] [lkp-robot] [sched/deadline] e0367b1267:
 WARNING:at_kernel/sched/sched.h:#assert_clock_updated
Message-ID: <20180125133551.GB19878@rei.lan>
References: <20180125062839.GM5185@yexl-desktop>
 <20180125112013.GA6110@localhost.localdomain>
 <20180125122458.GB3420@rei>
 <20180125132906.GA10968@localhost.localdomain>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20180125132906.GA10968@localhost.localdomain>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.2 (2016-11-26)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Hi!
> > > Hummm, wondering how LTP sched tests could trigger this, since a quick
> > > grep into ltp didn't show DEADLINE usage.
> > 
> > See kernel/syscalls/sched_setattr/sched_setattr01.c
> 
> Right, saw that. I was still thinking though why the report seemed to
> point to sched, and not syscalls, tests.

These collections of tests have sometimes non empty intersections. In
this case the particular test is both part of the sched and syscall
testruns (grep sched_setattr01 runtest/*). So I suppose that the test
fails both in the sched and syscall run but the sched one was simply
picked first here.

> Thanks for pointing this out.

Glad to help :-).

-- 
Cyril Hrubis
chrubis@suse.cz