Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: remove the unnecessary block around

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 12:03:26PM -0800, shuang.he@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Tested-By: PRC QA PRTS (Patch Regression Test System Contact: shuang.he@xxxxxxxxx)
> -------------------------------------Summary-------------------------------------
> Platform: baseline_drm_intel_nightly_pass_rate->patch_applied_pass_rate
> BYT: pass/total=291/291->290/291
> PNV: pass/total=356/356->356/356
> ILK: pass/total=372/372->371/372
> IVB: pass/total=545/546->545/546
> SNB: pass/total=380/380->378/380
> HSW: pass/total=579/579->579/579
> BDW: pass/total=434/435->434/435
> -------------------------------------Detailed-------------------------------------
> test_platform: test_suite, test_case, result_with_drm_intel_nightly(count, machine_id...)...->result_with_patch_applied(count, machine_id)...
> BYT: Intel_gpu_tools, igt_kms_setmode_invalid-clone-single-crtc, TIMEOUT(6, M36M31)PASS(1, M31) -> TIMEOUT(1, M36)PASS(3, M36)
> ILK: Intel_gpu_tools, igt_kms_setmode_invalid-clone-single-crtc, FAIL(2, M26)DMESG_FAIL(1, M26)TIMEOUT(6, M37M6)PASS(1, M26) -> TIMEOUT(1, M6)PASS(3, M6)
> IVB: Intel_gpu_tools, igt_gem_bad_reloc_negative-reloc, NSPT(3, M21M34)PASS(4, M34M21) -> NSPT(1, M21)PASS(3, M21)
> IVB: Intel_gpu_tools, igt_kms_setmode_invalid-clone-single-crtc, TIMEOUT(6, M34M21)PASS(1, M21) -> TIMEOUT(1, M21)PASS(3, M21)
> SNB: Intel_gpu_tools, igt_kms_mmio_vs_cs_flip_setcrtc_vs_cs_flip, PASS(4, M35M22) -> DMESG_WARN(1, M22)PASS(3, M22)
> SNB: Intel_gpu_tools, igt_kms_setmode_invalid-clone-single-crtc, TIMEOUT(6, M35M22)PASS(1, M35) -> TIMEOUT(1, M22)PASS(3, M22)
> BDW: Intel_gpu_tools, igt_gem_reset_stats_ban-bsd, DMESG_WARN(1, M28)PASS(6, M42M30) -> PASS(4, M30)
> BDW: Intel_gpu_tools, igt_kms_setmode_invalid-clone-single-crtc, TIMEOUT(6, M42M30)PASS(1, M28) -> TIMEOUT(1, M30)PASS(3, M30)

Damien already raised this in another patch, but this one here is another
case where the patch only changes whitespace really, but somehow PRTS
detects lots of changes. All tests really look funky and I have no idea
what exaclty might cause these test instabilities.
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx





[Index of Archives]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]
  Powered by Linux