On 03/10/18 23:29, Chris Wilson wrote:
Quoting Daniele Ceraolo Spurio (2018-10-03 23:45:02)
On 03/10/18 08:24, Chris Wilson wrote:
Quoting Daniele Ceraolo Spurio (2018-10-03 01:12:57)
On 02/10/18 15:39, Patchwork wrote:
== Series Details ==
Series: series starting with [v2,1/3] drm/i915/guc: init GuC descriptors after GuC load
URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/50464/
State : failure
== Summary ==
= CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_4915 -> Patchwork_10331 =
== Summary - FAILURE ==
Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_10331 absolutely need to be
verified manually.
If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
introduced in Patchwork_10331, please notify your bug team to allow them
to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI.
External URL: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/api/1.0/series/50464/revisions/1/mbox/
== Possible new issues ==
Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in Patchwork_10331:
=== IGT changes ===
==== Possible regressions ====
igt@drv_selftest@live_gem:
fi-whl-u: PASS -> INCOMPLETE
fi-skl-6600u: PASS -> INCOMPLETE
fi-kbl-7560u: PASS -> INCOMPLETE
fi-cfl-s3: PASS -> INCOMPLETE
fi-skl-iommu: PASS -> INCOMPLETE
fi-skl-6700k2: PASS -> INCOMPLETE
fi-skl-6700hq: PASS -> INCOMPLETE
fi-cfl-8109u: PASS -> INCOMPLETE
fi-kbl-7500u: PASS -> INCOMPLETE
fi-cfl-8700k: PASS -> INCOMPLETE
fi-skl-6770hq: PASS -> INCOMPLETE
fi-kbl-7567u: PASS -> INCOMPLETE
fi-kbl-x1275: PASS -> INCOMPLETE
fi-kbl-8809g: PASS -> INCOMPLETE
fi-kbl-r: PASS -> INCOMPLETE
Those failures are there even without my patches (see
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/40112/). Is there an existing
bugzilla? In the meantime, I'll have a look to see if I can find what's
causing this.
inject_preempt_context() fails when talking to the guc, catastrophe
ensues. As shown above it's quite reliable after a fake suspend/resume,
but it also happens during normal preemption (the preemption smoketest
was added to exercise this issue).
-Chris
Do you consider this a blocker to getting the patches merged?
BTW, on my SKL even with the preemption smoketest I didn't see any issue
on the tree I based the patches on (from Monday) and I only see issues
after:
b16c765122f987056e1dc9ef6c214571bb5bd694 is the first bad commit
commit b16c765122f987056e1dc9ef6c214571bb5bd694
Author: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon Oct 1 15:47:53 2018 +0100
drm/i915: Priority boost for new clients
However I don't get any error logs out (the machine just dies) so not
sure if it is the same issue or not. with that patch and the 2 following
related ones reverted I've been running the live selftests in a loop
without issues. Is this the bug you mentioned or are those possibly 2
different issues?
Possibly different, but unlikely since it's still the preemption that is
at the root cause. smoketest fails for me on bxt/kbl, either starting at
a timeout waiting for the preemption report, or the failure to send the
guc command. The difference with live_gem + preemption I think is all in
the timing, in that it tries to do a very early preemption, shortly
after the fw is loaded.
If you are confident that these are the patches you want, done.
-Chris
Thanks!
I'll try to get my hands on another platform to see if I can pull out
the guc logs in this scenario to see what the GuC perspective. Upcoming
FW has also changes in the area that should help.
Daniele
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
