On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 1:37 PM, Lofstedt, Marta <marta.lofstedt@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Daniel Vetter [mailto:daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Daniel >> Vetter >> Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2017 12:57 PM >> To: Intel Graphics Development <intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx>; Joonas Lahtinen >> <joonas.lahtinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; >> Lofstedt, Marta <marta.lofstedt@xxxxxxxxx>; Martin Peres >> <martin.peres@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH i-g-t] tests/gem_eio: Skip in-flight-suspend on snb >> >> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 11:51:51AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: >> > CI gets upset about it resulting in an incomplete, let's skip it until >> > that's fixed to avoid havoc in the CI farm. Of course this should/will >> > be reverted as soon as we have a fix (similar to how we dealt with the >> > snb-dies-in-blt-hangs issue). >> > >> > Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> > Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> > Cc: "Lofstedt, Marta" <marta.lofstedt@xxxxxxxxx> >> > Cc: Martin Peres <martin.peres@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> > References: >> > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/igt@gem_eio@in-flight-suspend >> > .html >> > References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103289 >> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> >> >> For more context, since I forgot to add: I'm definitely not advertising for >> abusing igt_skip to handle problematic testcases in general. What makes this >> special here is the combo of >> - new testcase >> - old machine where we don't have priority to fix things >> >> Hence why I think it'll make sense to treat this as a feature-like thing, where >> we simply skip if stuff doesn't work/isn't exposed on older platforms and >> shrug it off. And once someone does a free time project to fix it up, we can >> then remove the skip. >> >> I hope that explains a bit the reasoning from my behind using skip here. > > I am not buying this. > Could you define which old machines that we are not going to care about to find out that we are having this real issue? > I also don't understand why new test-cases should be treated differently compare to the old bad behaving ones we already have. What other old bad behaving ones do we have? The only other incomplete I'm seeing on older boxes is gem_exec_suspend@basice-s3, and I'm semi-tempted to do the same for that box too. But at least with fast-feedback the run order is fixed, so the tests which are not run are always the same ones. There's one more cibuglog entry for pre-gen9 machines: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102890 But cibuglog stats say reproduction rate is just 1%. I think that's ok, even for an incomplete. I don't see anything else. There's tons of issues on newer machines where we still care, and where we still are working on stabilizing them. But nothing else causing incompletes on gen8 or older afaict. -Daniel > > /Marta >> >> The other bit is that if/once Maarten figured out what's wrong with >> watermarks, we should be able to enable shard-snb reporting in CI results, >> which would be really great. Except we really can't have tests that >> incomplete, because they victimize too much else and so would need to >> blacklist until fixed one way or the other anyways. >> -Daniel >> >> > --- >> > tests/gem_eio.c | 3 +++ >> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) >> > >> > diff --git a/tests/gem_eio.c b/tests/gem_eio.c index >> > 899cb62728e3..28375e208232 100644 >> > --- a/tests/gem_eio.c >> > +++ b/tests/gem_eio.c >> > @@ -218,6 +218,9 @@ static void test_inflight_suspend(int fd) >> > igt_require(gem_has_exec_fence(fd)); >> > igt_require(i915_reset_control(false)); >> > >> > + igt_skip_on_f(IS_SANDYBRIDGE(intel_get_drm_devid(fd)), >> > + "random incompletes in CI with this test\n"); >> > + >> > memset(obj, 0, sizeof(obj)); >> > obj[0].flags = EXEC_OBJECT_WRITE; >> > obj[1].handle = gem_create(fd, 4096); >> > -- >> > 2.15.0.rc1 >> > >> >> -- >> Daniel Vetter >> Software Engineer, Intel Corporation >> http://blog.ffwll.ch -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
