>> >> >-----Original Message----- >> >From: Ville Syrjälä [mailto:ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] >> >Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2019 1:02 AM >> >To: Shankar, Uma <uma.shankar@xxxxxxxxx> >> >Cc: intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> >Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for Add HDR Metadata >> >Parsing and handling in DRM layer (rev10) >> > >> >On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 08:59:37AM +0000, Shankar, Uma wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >-----Original Message----- >> >> >From: Patchwork [mailto:patchwork@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] >> >> >Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2019 6:54 AM >> >> >To: Shankar, Uma <uma.shankar@xxxxxxxxx> >> >> >Cc: intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> >> >Subject: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for Add HDR Metadata Parsing and >> >> >handling in DRM layer >> >> >(rev10) >> >> > >> >> >== Series Details == >> >> > >> >> >Series: Add HDR Metadata Parsing and handling in DRM layer (rev10) >> >> >URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/25091/ >> >> >State : failure >> >> > >> >> >== Summary == >> >> > >> >> >CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_6081_full -> Patchwork_13017_full >> >> >==================================================== >> >> > >> >> >Summary >> >> >------- >> >> > >> >> > **FAILURE** >> >> > >> >> > Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_13017_full >> >> > absolutely need to be verified manually. >> >> > >> >> > If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the >> >> > changes introduced in Patchwork_13017_full, please notify your >> >> > bug team to allow them to document this new failure mode, which >> >> > will reduce false >> >positives in CI. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >Possible new issues >> >> >------------------- >> >> > >> >> > Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in >> >> >Patchwork_13017_full: >> >> > >> >> >### IGT changes ### >> >> > >> >> >#### Possible regressions #### >> >> > >> >> > * igt@gem_exec_suspend@basic-s3: >> >> > - shard-iclb: [PASS][1] -> [SKIP][2] +43 similar issues >> >> > [1]: >> >> >https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_6081/shard- >> >> >iclb6/igt@gem_exec_suspend@xxxxxxxxxxxxx >> >> > [2]: >> >> >https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_13017/shard- >> >> >iclb5/igt@gem_exec_suspend@xxxxxxxxxxxxx >> >> > >> >> > * igt@kms_prop_blob@invalid-set-prop-any: >> >> > - shard-iclb: [PASS][3] -> [FAIL][4] >> >> > [3]: >> >> >https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_6081/shard- >> >> >iclb6/igt@kms_prop_blob@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> >> > [4]: >> >> >https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_13017/shard- >> >> >iclb5/igt@kms_prop_blob@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> >> > >> >> >> >> Hi Martin, >> >> These issues are unrelated to the changes made in this series. Can >> >> you please have a look and confirm. >> > >> >The kms_prop fails at least are real. Probably due to the bogus >> >function arguements to the replace_blob() thing I pointed out. >> >> The CI IGT have a clean PASS now. > >You mean it went from FAIL to PASS on its own? Why did that happen? It was giving a PASS on earlier version v9 with same changes. But on v10 it gave this error. I was thinking it was re-run, on checking with Jani N he clarified that it was re-reported. >> Will anyways update the function arguments and make it consistent. >> >> Regards, >> Uma Shankar >> >> >-- >> >Ville Syrjälä >> >Intel > >-- >Ville Syrjälä >Intel _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
