On 19/10/2023 06:46, Maxime Ripard wrote:
Flaky tests can be very difficult to reproduce after the facts, which
will make it even harder to ever fix.
Let's document the metadata we agreed on to provide more context to
anyone trying to address these fixes.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/dri-devel/CAPj87rPbJ1V1-R7WMTHkDat2A4nwSd61Df9mdGH2PR=ZzxaU=Q@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
Signed-off-by: Maxime Ripard <mripard@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
Documentation/gpu/automated_testing.rst | 13 +++++++++++++
1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)
diff --git a/Documentation/gpu/automated_testing.rst b/Documentation/gpu/automated_testing.rst
index 469b6fb65c30..2dd0e221c2c3 100644
--- a/Documentation/gpu/automated_testing.rst
+++ b/Documentation/gpu/automated_testing.rst
@@ -67,6 +67,19 @@ Lists the tests that for a given driver on a specific hardware revision are
known to behave unreliably. These tests won't cause a job to fail regardless of
the result. They will still be run.
+Each new flake entry must be associated with a link to a bug report to
What do you mean by but report? Just a link to an email to the mailing
list is enough?
Also, I had made a mistake to the first flakes lists, which I corrected
with https://www.spinics.net/lists/kernel/msg4959629.html (there was a
bug in my script which ended up erroneous adding a bunch of tests in the
flake list, so I cleaned them up), I would like to kind request to let
me add those documentation in a future patch to not block that patch series.
Thanks
Helen
+the author of the affected driver, the board name or Device Tree name of
+the board, the first kernel version affected, and an approximation of
+the failure rate.
+
+They should be provided under the following format::
+
+ # Bug Report: $LORE_OR_PATCHWORK_URL
+ # Board Name: broken-board.dtb
+ # Version: 6.6-rc1
+ # Failure Rate: 100
+ flaky-test
+
drivers/gpu/drm/ci/${DRIVER_NAME}-${HW_REVISION}-skips.txt
-----------------------------------------------------------
