From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <stepnem@smrk.net>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on dcvr.yhbt.net
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-ASN:  
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.4 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
	DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS
	shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6
Received: from mail.smrk.net (mail.smrk.net [IPv6:2001:19f0:6c01:2788:5400:4ff:fe27:adaa])
	(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
	 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA512)
	(No client certificate requested)
	by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 356E71F452
	for <meta@public-inbox.org>; Thu, 19 Oct 2023 08:43:24 +0000 (UTC)
Authentication-Results: dcvr.yhbt.net;
	dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=smrk.net header.i=@smrk.net header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20221002 header.b=XPa7daj4;
	dkim-atps=neutral
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=smrk.net; s=20221002;
	t=1697705001;
	h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id:
	 to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type:
	 content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding:
	 in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references;
	bh=FlEXtA+SpcnULRk/QfsvH23Es3dtQVBgEN+7tqoEVXo=;
	b=XPa7daj4l4oFEMsqlY/0bidiSJNcOaQlZs/xJjmkII2i/leXY4NGjcLOKlJEk3cnv35i61
	4sssD6IpC0MC6c55u6t5MPqRsLqx/7TbMY150kZc3XkzFlBvovb4uKwi4a0ucKQQOKSX/S
	BLe04kjHZMwTe4ofE+vCBOcvX6pMpiDaYCr4qg6aoMQz7tLJ1A9SuvlJRb0D/YP3yVYioO
	eUgLsUTQjlbT4II7rLaZsM2MEQQ5B8w82A5PsmB+qKuFYCJQ81s1TG3fC3jHOyEXJ3aeZQ
	wxhLHkmwGLateUweGoqc+T5cNm2UfIhCjs5Rjs25o3ryYrDX7ynW4wBm9SFcXA==
Received: from localhost (<unknown> [192.168.5.2])
	by smrk (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPSA id 47d4c47d (TLSv1.3:TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256:NO);
	Thu, 19 Oct 2023 10:43:21 +0200 (CEST)
From: =?utf-8?B?xaB0xJtww6FuIE7Em21lYw==?= <stepnem@smrk.net>
To: Eric Wong <e@80x24.org>
Cc: meta@public-inbox.org
Subject: Re: imapd.t failing on OpenBSD, bisects to 13a2088c74fd (kqnotify:
 drop EV_CLEAR (edge triggering))
In-Reply-To: <20231018212319.M51504@dcvr>
References: <20231018170111+0200.599564-stepnem@smrk.net>
 <20231018190634.M893199@dcvr>
 <20231018211801+0200.254938-stepnem@smrk.net> <20231018212319.M51504@dcvr>
User-Agent: Notmuch/0.38 (https://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/30.0.50
 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2023 10:43:20 +0200
Message-ID: <20231019104320+0200.219147-stepnem@smrk.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
List-Id: <meta.public-inbox.org>

On Wed, 18 Oct 2023 21:23:18 +0000
Eric Wong wrote:

> Though I am curious if it's a red herring or not...  If you have
> spare cycles to test on 7.3 or 7.4, it'd be greatly appreciated
> (but no obligations to do so)

I downgraded the VM to 7.3, ran tests (this time updated to
848dedde919 (lei: simplify startq/au_done wakeup
notifications), just with the EV_CLEAR re-removal on top),
then upgraded to 7.4, ran tests.  I see the same failure
pattern everywhere, so I really don't think the OpenBSD
version is a factor here.

(And again, if you want to have a look yourself, I'd be
happy to give you access to the machine; still the same
testing OC VM.)

--=20
=C5=A0t=C4=9Bp=C3=A1n