Hi Abhinav,
On 14/12/24 01:09, Abhinav Kumar wrote:
Hi Vignesh
On 12/11/2024 9:10 PM, Vignesh Raman wrote:
Hi Abhinav / Helen,
On 12/12/24 01:48, Abhinav Kumar wrote:
Hi Helen / Vignesh
On 12/4/2024 12:33 PM, Helen Mae Koike Fornazier wrote:
---- On Wed, 04 Dec 2024 16:21:26 -0300 Abhinav Kumar wrote ---
> Hi Helen
>
> On 12/4/2024 11:14 AM, Helen Mae Koike Fornazier wrote:
> > Hi Abhinav,
> >
> > Thanks for your patch.
> >
> >
> >
> > ---- On Wed, 04 Dec 2024 15:55:17 -0300 Abhinav Kumar wrote ---
> >
> > > From the jobs [1] and [2] of pipeline [3], its clear that
> > > kms_cursor_legacy@torture-bo is most certainly a flake and
> > > not a fail for apq8016. Mark the test accordingly to match
the results.
> > >
> > > [1] : https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/msm/-/jobs/67676481
The test passes -
kms_cursor_legacy@torture-bo,UnexpectedImprovement(Pass)
Yes, thats the problem
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/msm/-/jobs/67676481/viewer#L2696
24-12-04 03:51:55 R SERIAL> [ 179.241309] [IGT] kms_cursor_legacy:
finished subtest all-pipes, SUCCESS
24-12-04 03:51:55 R SERIAL> [ 179.241812] [IGT] kms_cursor_legacy:
finished subtest torture-bo, SUCCESS
Here it passes whereas it was marked a failure. Hence pipeline fails.
Yes it fails due to,
Unexpected results:
kms_cursor_legacy@torture-bo,UnexpectedImprovement(Pass)
In this case, we need to remove this test from fails.txt
> > > [2] : https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/msm/-/jobs/67677430
There are no test failures
No, thats not true
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/msm/-/jobs/67677430/viewer#L2694
24-12-04 04:18:38 R SERIAL> [ 170.379649] Console: switching to colour
dummy device 80x25
24-12-04 04:18:38 R SERIAL> [ 170.379938] [IGT] kms_cursor_legacy:
executing
24-12-04 04:18:38 R SERIAL> [ 170.393868] [IGT] kms_cursor_legacy:
starting subtest torture-bo
24-12-04 04:18:38 R SERIAL> [ 170.394186] [IGT] kms_cursor_legacy:
starting dynamic subtest pipe-A
24-12-04 04:18:38 R SERIAL> [ 170.661749] [IGT] kms_cursor_legacy:
finished subtest pipe-A, FAIL
24-12-04 04:18:38 R SERIAL> [ 170.662060] [IGT] kms_cursor_legacy:
starting dynamic subtest all-pipes
24-12-04 04:18:38 R SERIAL> [ 170.713237] [IGT] kms_cursor_legacy:
finished subtest all-pipes, FAIL
24-12-04 04:18:38 R SERIAL> [ 170.713513] [IGT] kms_cursor_legacy:
finished subtest torture-bo, FAIL
24-12-04 04:18:38 R SERIAL> [ 170.721263] [IGT] kms_cursor_legacy:
exiting, ret=98
24-12-04 04:18:38 R SERIAL> [ 170.737857] Console: switching to colour
frame buffer device 128x48
Please check these logs, the torture-bo test-case did fail. The pipeline
was marked pass because it was an expected fail.
So we have two pipelines, where one failed and the other passed. So
thats a flake for me.
Yes agree. So if we had removed the test from fails, deqp-runner would
have reported this as flake.
deqp-runner runs the test and if it fails, it retries. If the test
passes on retry, it is reported as a flake.
> > > [3]:
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/msm/-/pipelines/1322770
The job is same as 2
In this case, the test passes and deqp-runner does not report it as
flake. So we only need to remove it from fails file.
No, like I mentioned above we have a pass and a fail.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Abhinav Kumar quic_abhinavk@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/ci/xfails/msm-apq8016-flakes.txt | 5 +++++
> > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git
a/drivers/gpu/drm/ci/xfails/msm-apq8016-flakes.txt
b/drivers/gpu/drm/ci/xfails/msm-apq8016-flakes.txt
> > > new file mode 100644
> > > index 000000000000..18639853f18f
> > > --- /dev/null
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/ci/xfails/msm-apq8016-flakes.txt
> > > @@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
> > > +# Board Name: msm-apq8016-db410c
> > > +# Failure Rate: 100
> >
> > Is failure rate is 100%, isn't it a fail than?
> > (I know we have other cases with Failure Rate: 100, maybe we
should fix them as well)
> >
>
> Maybe I misunderstood the meaning of "Failure rate" for a flake.
>
> I interpreted this as this test being flaky 100% of the time :)
Ah right, I see, inside deqp-runner (that auto-retries).
I'd like to hear Vignesh's opinion on this.
(In any case, we probably should document this better)
deqp-runner reports new (not present in flakes file) or known (present
in flakes file) flakes
2024-12-11 07:25:44.709666: Some new flakes found:
2024-12-11 07:25:44.709676: kms_lease@page-flip-implicit-plane
2024-12-11 13:15:16.482890: Some known flakes found:
2024-12-11 13:15:16.482898:
kms_async_flips@async-flip-with-page-flip-events-atomic
we add it to flakes file if deqp runner reports new flakes. Another
case where we update flake tests is when a test passes in one run but
fails in another, but deqp-runner does not report it as flake.
Regards,
Vignesh
The confusion here i guess is about what to mention as a "Failure rate"
Failure rate means how many times it fails (like normally) ? In that
case 100% which I used is wrong and I used 33% instead for which I have
pushed v2.
Yes, 33% is correct and please remove this test from fails.txt
Regards,
Vignesh
Regards,
Helen
Can you let me know which way we need to go?
Just in case I did post a v2 fixing this,
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/627276/
If thats the way to go, can you pls take a look?
Thanks
Abhinav
>
> Out of the 3 runs of the test, it passed 2/3 times and failed 1/3.
>
> So its fail % actually is 33.33% in that case.
>
> I think I saw a Failure rate of 100% on
msm-sm8350-hdk-flakes.txt and
> mistook that as the rate at which flakes are seen.
>
> Let me fix this up as 33%
>
> > Regards,
> > Helen
> >
> > > +# IGT Version: 1.28-ga73311079
> > > +# Linux Version: 6.12.0-rc2
> > > +kms_cursor_legacy@torture-bo
> > >
> > > ---
> > > base-commit: 798bb342e0416d846cf67f4725a3428f39bfb96b
> > > change-id: 20241204-cursor_tor_skip-9d128dd62c4f
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > > --
> > > Abhinav Kumar quic_abhinavk@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > >
> >
>
