Simon,
I need some help to understand the report of buildman. Use this example, when I build all arm and powerpc boards,
$ tools/buildman/buildman -b working_qoriq arm powerpc -s
Summary of 19 commits for 1023 boards (24 threads, 1 job per thread) 01: ls102xa: dcu: Add platform support for DCU on LS1021ATWR board arm: + tricorder_flash vf610twr tricorder powerpc: + taishan dlvision 02: video: dcu: Add DCU driver support 03: video: dcu: Add Sii9022A HDMI Transmitter support 04: arm: ls102xa: Add LETECH support for LS1021AQDS/TWR board 05: serial: lpuart: add 32-bit registers lpuart support 06: net: tsec: Remove tx snooping support from LS1 arm: vf610twr 07: arm: ls102xa: Add basic support for LS1021ATWR board 08: arm: ls102xa: Add basic support for LS1021AQDS board arm: + ls1021atwr_nor ls1021atwr_letech 09: driver/ddr/fsl: Add support of overriding chip select write leveling arm: + ls1021aqds_nor ls1021aqds_letech 10: driver/ddr/freescale: Fix DDR3 driver for ARM 11: driver/ddr/freescale: Add support of accumulate ECC 12: ls102xa: esdhc: Add esdhc support for LS102xA 13: ls102xa: etsec: Add etsec support for LS102xA 14: net: mdio: Use mb() to be compatible for both ARM and PowerPC 15: net: mdio: Add private MDIO read/write function 16: net: Merge asm/fsl_enet.h into fsl_mdio.h 17: ls102xa: i2c: Add i2c support for LS102xA 18: arm: ls102xa: Add Freescale LS102xA SoC support 19: patman: Only use git's --no-decorate when available
First, is the build supposed to be top down or bottom up? It looks like buildman starts to build from the last commit and works it way down. What I don't understand is the new board. Under patch 08 and 09, I see two boards failed. But these two boards don't exist until a later commit. Should I use --force-reconfig switch?
Second, when I see a failed board under a commit, is this commit causing the failure? It is not the case in my example. I see vf610twr failed under 01, but the actual failure is caused by commit 05.
York