Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915/dsc: Fix bigjoiner check in dsc_disable (rev4)
@Kulkarni, Vandita<mailto:vandita.kulka...@intel.com> We have rev5 now, so do you want me to re-report rev4 results? if we are re-testing as part of rev 5, re-reporting is needed. https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/91006/#rev5 Lakshmi. From: Kulkarni, Vandita Sent: Wednesday, June 9, 2021 12:08 AM To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Navare, Manasi D ; Vudum, Lakshminarayana Cc: Gupta, Anshuman Subject: RE: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915/dsc: Fix bigjoiner check in dsc_disable (rev4) This issue doesn’t seem to be related to the patch. @Vudum, Lakshminarayana<mailto:lakshminarayana.vu...@intel.com> can you report the results. From: Intel-gfx mailto:intel-gfx-boun...@lists.freedesktop.org>> On Behalf Of Patchwork Sent: Tuesday, June 8, 2021 4:08 PM To: Navare, Manasi D mailto:manasi.d.nav...@intel.com>> Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org<mailto:intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org> Subject: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915/dsc: Fix bigjoiner check in dsc_disable (rev4) Patch Details Series: drm/i915/dsc: Fix bigjoiner check in dsc_disable (rev4) URL: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/91006/ State: failure Details: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20303/index.html CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_10188_full -> Patchwork_20303_full Summary FAILURE Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_20303_full absolutely need to be verified manually. If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes introduced in Patchwork_20303_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_20303_full: IGT changes Possible regressions * igt@kms_plane@plane-position-hole@pipe-b-planes: * shard-tglb: PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10188/shard-tglb2/igt@kms_plane@plane-position-h...@pipe-b-planes.html> -> INCOMPLETE<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20303/shard-tglb3/igt@kms_plane@plane-position-h...@pipe-b-planes.html> Known issues Here are the changes found in Patchwork_20303_full that come from known issues: IGT changes Issues hit * igt@feature_discovery@display-2x: * shard-iclb: NOTRUN -> SKIP<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20303/shard-iclb4/igt@feature_discov...@display-2x.html> ([i915#1839]) * igt@feature_discovery@psr2: * shard-iclb: PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10188/shard-iclb2/igt@feature_discov...@psr2.html> -> SKIP<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20303/shard-iclb6/igt@feature_discov...@psr2.html> ([i915#658]) * igt@gem_create@create-massive: * shard-snb: NOTRUN -> DMESG-WARN<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20303/shard-snb2/igt@gem_cre...@create-massive.html> ([i915#3002]) * shard-apl: NOTRUN -> DMESG-WARN<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20303/shard-apl3/igt@gem_cre...@create-massive.html> ([i915#3002]) * igt@gem_ctx_persistence@clone: * shard-snb: NOTRUN -> SKIP<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20303/shard-snb2/igt@gem_ctx_persiste...@clone.html> ([fdo#109271] / [i915#1099]) +4 similar issues * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-deadline: * shard-kbl: NOTRUN -> FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20303/shard-kbl6/igt@gem_exec_f...@basic-deadline.html> ([i915#2846]) * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-share@rcs0: * shard-apl: PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10188/shard-apl7/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-sh...@rcs0.html> -> SKIP<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20303/shard-apl3/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-sh...@rcs0.html> ([fdo#109271]) * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none@vcs0: * shard-kbl: PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10188/shard-kbl4/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-n...@vcs0.html> -> FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20303/shard-kbl7/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-n...@vcs0.html> ([i915#2842]) * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace@rcs0: * shard-tglb: PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10188/shard-tglb2/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-p...@rcs0.html> -> FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20303/shard-tglb3/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-p...@rcs0.html> ([i915#2842]) * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace@vecs0: * shard-glk: NOTRUN -> FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20303/shard-glk7/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-p...@vecs0.html> ([i915#2842]) +2 similar issues * igt@gem_exec_reloc@basic-wide-active@rcs0: * shard-kbl: NOTRUN -> FAIL<https://intel
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915: Force a TypeC PHY disconnect during suspend/shutdown
Re-reported. -Original Message- From: Deak, Imre Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2021 9:20 AM To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Chris Chiu ; Shankar, Uma ; Vudum, Lakshminarayana Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915: Force a TypeC PHY disconnect during suspend/shutdown On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 09:28:31PM +, Patchwork wrote: > == Series Details == > > Series: drm/i915: Force a TypeC PHY disconnect during suspend/shutdown > URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/91345/ > State : failure Thanks for the report, testing and review. Pushed to drm-intel-next with the missing static fn sparse error fixed. Lakshmi, could you look at the unrelated issues below? > > == Summary == > > CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_10205_full -> Patchwork_20334_full > > > Summary > --- > > **FAILURE** > > Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_20334_full absolutely need to > be > verified manually. > > If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes > introduced in Patchwork_20334_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_20334_full: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Possible regressions > > * igt@gem_exec_whisper@basic-forked: > - shard-tglb: [PASS][1] -> [INCOMPLETE][2] >[1]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10205/shard-tglb2/igt@gem_exec_whis...@basic-forked.html >[2]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20334/shard-tglb7/i > gt@gem_exec_whis...@basic-forked.html No TypeC sinks connected to this system, nor any suspend tests ran before this failure: [21.819973] Initializing watchdogs [21.820092] /dev/watchdog0 [21.825864] [001/129] (960s left) gem_exec_schedule (deep) Starting subtest: deep Starting dynamic subtest: rcs0 Dynamic subtest rcs0: SUCCESS (7.361s) Starting dynamic subtest: bcs0 Dynamic subtest bcs0: SUCCESS (7.596s) Starting dynamic subtest: vcs0 Dynamic subtest vcs0: SUCCESS (7.442s) Starting dynamic subtest: vcs1 Dynamic subtest vcs1: SUCCESS (7.491s) Starting dynamic subtest: vecs0 Dynamic subtest vecs0: SUCCESS (7.501s) Subtest deep: SUCCESS (37.391s) [59.664849] [002/129] (922s left) gem_exec_whisper (basic-forked) No pstore logs available either, so just guessing that it may be related to one of: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/2263 https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/3488 > Known issues > > > Here are the changes found in Patchwork_20334_full that come from known > issues: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Issues hit > > * igt@gem_ctx_persistence@clone: > - shard-snb: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][3] ([fdo#109271] / [i915#1099]) +5 > similar issues >[3]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20334/shard-snb5/ig > t@gem_ctx_persiste...@clone.html > > * igt@gem_eio@in-flight-suspend: > - shard-kbl: [PASS][4] -> [DMESG-WARN][5] ([i915#180]) +2 > similar issues >[4]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10205/shard-kbl1/igt@gem_...@in-flight-suspend.html >[5]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20334/shard-kbl7/ig > t@gem_...@in-flight-suspend.html > > * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-deadline: > - shard-apl: NOTRUN -> [FAIL][6] ([i915#2846]) >[6]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20334/shard-apl8/ig > t@gem_exec_f...@basic-deadline.html > > * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-flow@rcs0: > - shard-skl: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][7] ([fdo#109271]) +51 similar > issues >[7]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20334/shard-skl1/ig > t@gem_exec_fair@basic-f...@rcs0.html > > * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-share@rcs0: > - shard-glk: [PASS][8] -> [FAIL][9] ([i915#2842]) >[8]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10205/shard-glk3/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-sh...@rcs0.html >[9]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20334/shard-glk3/ig > t@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-sh...@rcs0.html > > * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none@vecs0: > - shard-kbl: [PASS][10] -> [FAIL][11] ([i915#2842]) +1 similar > issue >[10]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10205/shard-kbl2/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-n...@vecs0.html >[11]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20334/shard-kbl6/ig > t@ge
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for series starting with [v7,1/8] drm/i915/gem: Break out some shmem backend utils
-Original Message- From: Tvrtko Ursulin Sent: Thursday, October 7, 2021 6:41 AM To: Christian König ; intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org Cc: Vudum, Lakshminarayana Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for series starting with [v7,1/8] drm/i915/gem: Break out some shmem backend utils On 07/10/2021 13:57, Christian König wrote: > Am 07.10.21 um 12:51 schrieb Tvrtko Ursulin: >> >> On 07/10/2021 10:19, Christian König wrote: >>> Am 07.10.21 um 11:15 schrieb Tvrtko Ursulin: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> On 06/10/2021 16:26, Patchwork wrote: >>>>> *Patch Details* >>>>> *Series:* series starting with [v7,1/8] drm/i915/gem: Break out >>>>> some shmem backend utils >>>>> *URL:* https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/95501/ >>>>> <https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/95501/> >>>>> *State:* failure >>>>> *Details:* >>>>> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21264/index.htm >>>>> l >>>>> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21264/index.ht >>>>> ml> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_10688_full -> >>>>> Patchwork_21264_full >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Summary >>>>> >>>>> *FAILURE* >>>>> >>>>> Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_21264_full >>>>> absolutely need to be verified manually. >>>>> >>>>> If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the >>>>> changes introduced in Patchwork_21264_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_21264_full: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> IGT changes >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Possible regressions >>>>> >>>>> * >>>>> >>>>> igt@gem_sync@basic-many-each: >>>>> >>>>> o shard-apl: NOTRUN -> INCOMPLETE >>>>> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21264/shard-ap >>>>> l7/igt@gem_s...@basic-many-each.html> >>>>> >>>> Something still fishy in the unlocked iterator? Or >>>> dma_resv_get_fences using it? >>> >>> Probably the later. I'm going to take a look. >>> >>> Thanks for the notice, >>> Christian. >>> >>>> >>>> <6> [187.551235] [IGT] gem_sync: starting subtest basic-many-each >>>> <1> [188.935462] BUG: kernel NULL pointer dereference, address: >>>> 0010 >>>> <1> [188.935485] #PF: supervisor write access in kernel mode <1> >>>> [188.935495] #PF: error_code(0x0002) - not-present page <6> >>>> [188.935504] PGD 0 P4D 0 <4> [188.935512] Oops: 0002 [#1] PREEMPT >>>> SMP NOPTI <4> [188.935521] CPU: 2 PID: 1467 Comm: gem_sync Not >>>> tainted 5.15.0-rc4-CI-Patchwork_21264+ #1 <4> [188.935535] Hardware >>>> name: /NUC6CAYB, BIOS >>>> AYAPLCEL.86A.0049.2018.0508.1356 05/08/2018 <4> [188.935546] RIP: >>>> 0010:dma_resv_get_fences+0x116/0x2d0 >>>> <4> [188.935560] Code: 10 85 c0 7f c9 be 03 00 00 00 e8 15 8b df ff >>>> eb bd e8 8e c6 ff ff eb b6 41 8b 04 24 49 8b 55 00 48 89 e7 8d 48 >>>> 01 >>>> 41 89 0c 24 <4c> 89 34 c2 e8 41 f2 ff ff 49 89 c6 48 85 c0 75 8c 48 >>>> 8b 44 24 10 <4> [188.935583] RSP: 0018:c900011dbcc8 EFLAGS: >>>> 00010202 <4> [188.935593] RAX: RBX: >>>> RCX: >>>> 0001 >>>> <4> [188.935603] RDX: 0010 RSI: 822e343c RDI: >>>> c900011dbcc8 >>>> <4> [188.935613] RBP: c900011dbd48 R08: 88812d255bb8 R09: >>>> fffe >>>> <4> [188.935623] R10: 0001 R11: R12: >>>> c900011dbd44 >>>> <4> [188.935633] R13: c900011dbd50 R14: 888113d29cc0 R15: >>>> >>>&g
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for Fixup header includes (rev2)
Re-reported. -Original Message- From: De Marchi, Lucas Sent: Friday, October 8, 2021 8:10 AM To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org Cc: Vudum, Lakshminarayana Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for Fixup header includes (rev2) On Fri, Oct 08, 2021 at 06:44:35AM +, Patchwork wrote: >== Series Details == > >Series: Fixup header includes (rev2) >URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/95587/ >State : failure > >== Summary == > >CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_10697 -> Patchwork_21289 > > >Summary >--- > > **FAILURE** > > Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_21289 absolutely need > to be verified manually. > > If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes > introduced in Patchwork_21289, please notify your bug team to allow > them to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in > CI. > > External URL: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21289/index.html > >Possible new issues >--- > > Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in > Patchwork_21289: > >### IGT changes ### > > Possible regressions > > * igt@gem_exec_suspend@basic-s0: >- fi-kbl-soraka: [PASS][1] -> [INCOMPLETE][2] > [1]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10697/fi-kbl-soraka/igt@gem_exec_susp...@basic-s0.html > [2]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21289/fi-kbl-soraka > /igt@gem_exec_susp...@basic-s0.html unrelated to header moves. Like issues https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10685/fi-kbl-soraka/igt@gem_exec_susp...@basic-s0.html https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10658/fi-kbl-soraka/igt@gem_exec_susp...@basic-s0.html Lucas De Marchi
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915/dp: Fix link parameter use in lack of a valid DPCD (rev2)
Re-reported. Looks like kms_bw tests are broken? -Original Message- From: Deak, Imre Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2021 5:54 AM To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Vudum, Lakshminarayana Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915/dp: Fix link parameter use in lack of a valid DPCD (rev2) Hi Lakshmi, the failure below is expected, could we add cibug filter for it? On Tue, Oct 19, 2021 at 12:52:22AM +, Patchwork wrote: > == Series Details == > > Series: drm/i915/dp: Fix link parameter use in lack of a valid DPCD (rev2) > URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/95948/ > State : failure > > == Summary == > > CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_10753_full -> Patchwork_21374_full > > > Summary > --- > > **FAILURE** > > Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_21374_full absolutely need to > be > verified manually. > > If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes > introduced in Patchwork_21374_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_21374_full: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Possible regressions > > * igt@kms_bw@linear-tiling-4-displays-1920x1080p: > - shard-apl: NOTRUN -> [FAIL][1] +2 similar issues >[1]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21374/shard-apl3/ig > t@kms...@linear-tiling-4-displays-1920x1080p.html The test is broken, since it assumes it can set any mode on any connector. However these modesets won't through a WARN() any more after this change. > Warnings > > * igt@kms_bw@linear-tiling-3-displays-2560x1440p: > - shard-apl: [DMESG-FAIL][2] ([i915#4298]) -> [FAIL][3] +2 > similar issues >[2]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10753/shard-apl7/igt@kms...@linear-tiling-3-displays-2560x1440p.html >[3]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21374/shard-apl7/ig > t@kms...@linear-tiling-3-displays-2560x1440p.html > > > Known issues > > > Here are the changes found in Patchwork_21374_full that come from known > issues: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Issues hit > > * igt@gem_create@create-massive: > - shard-apl: NOTRUN -> [DMESG-WARN][4] ([i915#3002]) >[4]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21374/shard-apl3/ig > t@gem_cre...@create-massive.html > > * igt@gem_ctx_isolation@preservation-s3@rcs0: > - shard-tglb: [PASS][5] -> [INCOMPLETE][6] ([i915#1373]) >[5]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10753/shard-tglb1/igt@gem_ctx_isolation@preservation...@rcs0.html >[6]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21374/shard-tglb7/i > gt@gem_ctx_isolation@preservation...@rcs0.html > > * igt@gem_ctx_param@set-priority-not-supported: > - shard-iclb: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][7] ([fdo#109314]) >[7]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21374/shard-iclb8/i > gt@gem_ctx_pa...@set-priority-not-supported.html > > * igt@gem_ctx_persistence@legacy-engines-hostile: > - shard-snb: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][8] ([fdo#109271] / [i915#1099]) >[8]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21374/shard-snb7/ig > t@gem_ctx_persiste...@legacy-engines-hostile.html > > * igt@gem_ctx_persistence@many-contexts: > - shard-tglb: NOTRUN -> [FAIL][9] ([i915#2410]) >[9]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21374/shard-tglb3/i > gt@gem_ctx_persiste...@many-contexts.html > > * igt@gem_eio@unwedge-stress: > - shard-tglb: [PASS][10] -> [TIMEOUT][11] ([i915#2369] / > [i915#3063] / [i915#3648]) >[10]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10753/shard-tglb2/igt@gem_...@unwedge-stress.html >[11]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21374/shard-tglb2/i > gt@gem_...@unwedge-stress.html > > * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-rrul@rcs0: > - shard-glk: NOTRUN -> [FAIL][12] ([i915#2842]) >[12]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21374/shard-glk9/ig > t@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-r...@rcs0.html > > * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace@rcs0: > - shard-kbl: [PASS][13] -> [FAIL][14] ([i915#2842]) +1 similar > issue >[13]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10753/shard-kbl2/igt@gem_exec_fa
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for series starting with [v2,1/4] drm/i915/clflush: fixup handling of cache_dirty (rev2)
Filed https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/4412 and reported. igt@i915_hangman@engine-hang@vcs0 - incomplete - No warnings/errors Lakshmi. -Original Message- From: Auld, Matthew Sent: Friday, October 29, 2021 2:10 AM To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Vudum, Lakshminarayana Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for series starting with [v2,1/4] drm/i915/clflush: fixup handling of cache_dirty (rev2) On 28/10/2021 13:57, Patchwork wrote: > *Patch Details* > *Series:* series starting with [v2,1/4] drm/i915/clflush: fixup handling > of cache_dirty (rev2) > *URL:*https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/96348/ > <https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/96348/> > *State:* failure > *Details:* > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21471/index.html > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21471/index.html> > > > CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_10805_full -> Patchwork_21471_full > > > Summary > > *FAILURE* > > Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_21471_full absolutely > need to be verified manually. > > If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes > introduced in Patchwork_21471_full, please notify your bug team to > allow them to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false > positives in CI. > > > Participating hosts (10 -> 10) > > No changes in participating hosts > > > Possible new issues > > Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in > Patchwork_21471_full: > > > IGT changes > > > Possible regressions > > * igt@i915_hangman@engine-hang@vcs0: > o shard-tglb: PASS > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10805/shard-tglb8/igt@i915_hangman@engine-h...@vcs0.html> > -> INCOMPLETE > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21471/shard-tglb6/ > igt@i915_hangman@engine-h...@vcs0.html> Looks like false positive. This series should only really impact discrete. > > > Known issues > > Here are the changes found in Patchwork_21471_full that come from > known > issues: > > > IGT changes > > > Issues hit > > * > > igt@feature_discovery@display-4x: > > o shard-tglb: NOTRUN -> SKIP > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21471/shard-tglb2/igt@feature_discov...@display-4x.html> > ([i915#1839]) > * > > igt@gem_ctx_persistence@legacy-engines-hang@blt: > > o shard-skl: NOTRUN -> SKIP > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21471/shard-skl9/igt@gem_ctx_persistence@legacy-engines-h...@blt.html> > ([fdo#109271]) +342 similar issues > * > > igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-deadline: > > o shard-apl: NOTRUN -> FAIL > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21471/shard-apl3/igt@gem_exec_f...@basic-deadline.html> > ([i915#2846]) > * > > igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace-share@rcs0: > > o shard-kbl: NOTRUN -> FAIL > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21471/shard-kbl7/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace-sh...@rcs0.html> > ([i915#2842]) > * > > igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace-solo@rcs0: > > o shard-tglb: NOTRUN -> FAIL > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21471/shard-tglb2/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace-s...@rcs0.html> > ([i915#2842]) > * > > igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace@bcs0: > > o shard-iclb: PASS > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10805/shard-iclb8/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-p...@bcs0.html> > -> FAIL > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21471/shard-iclb4/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-p...@bcs0.html> > ([i915#2842]) > * > > igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace@vcs1: > > o shard-iclb: NOTRUN -> FAIL > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21471/shard-iclb4/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-p...@vcs1.html> > ([i915#2842]) > * > > igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace@vecs0: > > o shard-tglb: PASS > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10805/shard-tglb3/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-p...@vecs0.html> > -> FAIL > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21471/shard-tglb3/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-p...@vecs0.html> > ([i915#2842]) > * > > igt@gem_exec_params@secure-non-root:
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915: Make wa list per-gt (rev2)
Reported. -Original Message- From: Roper, Matthew D Sent: Monday, September 20, 2021 7:53 AM To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org Cc: Vudum, Lakshminarayana ; Kijanczuk, Damian Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915: Make wa list per-gt (rev2) On Sat, Sep 18, 2021 at 01:46:39AM +, Patchwork wrote: > == Series Details == > > Series: drm/i915: Make wa list per-gt (rev2) > URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/94811/ > State : failure > > == Summary == > > CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_10605_full -> Patchwork_21091_full > > > Summary > --- > > **FAILURE** > > Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_21091_full absolutely need to > be > verified manually. > > If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes > introduced in Patchwork_21091_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_21091_full: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Possible regressions > > * igt@kms_atomic@plane-invalid-params: > - shard-iclb: [PASS][1] -> [DMESG-WARN][2] >[1]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10605/shard-iclb6/igt@kms_ato...@plane-invalid-params.html >[2]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21091/shard-iclb2/i > gt@kms_ato...@plane-invalid-params.html https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/3728 > > * igt@kms_ccs@pipe-a-crc-primary-basic-y_tiled_gen12_mc_ccs: > - shard-kbl: NOTRUN -> [INCOMPLETE][3] >[3]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21091/shard-kbl2/ig > t@kms_ccs@pipe-a-crc-primary-basic-y_tiled_gen12_mc_ccs.html <0>[ 148.225355] NMI watchdog: Watchdog detected hard LOCKUP on cpu 2 with some CPU(s) stuck in snd_hda_codec's azx_interrupt(). We've seen this signature on other CI failures recently too; it seems to be something introduced by the 5.15-rc1 backmerge, although I'm not sure if there's a gitlab issue open for it yet. > > * igt@kms_sequence@queue-idle: > - shard-skl: [PASS][4] -> [FAIL][5] >[4]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10605/shard-skl8/igt@kms_seque...@queue-idle.html >[5]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21091/shard-skl3/ig > t@kms_seque...@queue-idle.html Looks like https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/2441 was just closed because it couldn't be reproduced, but it seems to still be happening. Matt > > > Known issues > > > Here are the changes found in Patchwork_21091_full that come from known > issues: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Issues hit > > * igt@drm_import_export@flink: > - shard-tglb: [PASS][6] -> [INCOMPLETE][7] ([i915#750]) >[6]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10605/shard-tglb7/igt@drm_import_exp...@flink.html >[7]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21091/shard-tglb2/i > gt@drm_import_exp...@flink.html > > * igt@gem_ctx_isolation@preservation-s3@vcs0: > - shard-skl: [PASS][8] -> [INCOMPLETE][9] ([i915#146] / > [i915#198]) >[8]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10605/shard-skl6/igt@gem_ctx_isolation@preservation...@vcs0.html >[9]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21091/shard-skl4/ig > t@gem_ctx_isolation@preservation...@vcs0.html > > * igt@gem_ctx_sseu@engines: > - shard-skl: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][10] ([fdo#109271]) +9 similar > issues >[10]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21091/shard-skl10/i > gt@gem_ctx_s...@engines.html > > * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace-share@rcs0: > - shard-tglb: [PASS][11] -> [FAIL][12] ([i915#2842]) >[11]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10605/shard-tglb1/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace-sh...@rcs0.html >[12]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21091/shard-tglb5/i > gt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace-sh...@rcs0.html > > * igt@gem_exec_params@rsvd2-dirt: > - shard-tglb: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][13] ([fdo#109283]) >[13]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21091/shard-tglb1/i > gt@gem_exec_par...@rsvd2-dirt.html > > * igt@gem_media_vme: > - shard-tglb: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][14] ([i915#284]) >[14]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915/gt: Add "intel_" as prefix in set_mocs_index() (rev3)
Re-reported. -Original Message- From: Roper, Matthew D Sent: Monday, September 20, 2021 8:26 AM To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org Cc: Siddiqui, Ayaz A ; Vudum, Lakshminarayana ; Kijanczuk, Damian Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915/gt: Add "intel_" as prefix in set_mocs_index() (rev3) On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 11:42:09PM +, Patchwork wrote: > == Series Details == > > Series: drm/i915/gt: Add "intel_" as prefix in set_mocs_index() (rev3) > URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/94721/ > State : failure > > == Summary == > > CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_10605_full -> Patchwork_21088_full > > > Summary > --- > > **FAILURE** > > Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_21088_full absolutely need to > be > verified manually. > > If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes > introduced in Patchwork_21088_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_21088_full: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Possible regressions > > * igt@kms_ccs@pipe-a-crc-primary-basic-y_tiled_gen12_mc_ccs: > - shard-iclb: NOTRUN -> [INCOMPLETE][1] >[1]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21088/shard-iclb7/i > gt@kms_ccs@pipe-a-crc-primary-basic-y_tiled_gen12_mc_ccs.html As seen on other CI series, a bunch of snd_hda_intel "spurious response" errors, followed by <0>[ 228.961637] NMI watchdog: Watchdog detected hard LOCKUP on cpu 4 with CPU cores stuck in azx_interrupt. > > * igt@kms_flip_scaled_crc@flip-32bpp-ytileccs-to-64bpp-ytile: > - shard-iclb: [PASS][2] -> [SKIP][3] >[2]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10605/shard-iclb7/igt@kms_flip_scaled_...@flip-32bpp-ytileccs-to-64bpp-ytile.html >[3]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21088/shard-iclb2/i > gt@kms_flip_scaled_...@flip-32bpp-ytileccs-to-64bpp-ytile.html https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/3701 except it's on a "ytileccs" subtest instead of just "ytile" > > * igt@kms_frontbuffer_tracking@fbc-1p-offscren-pri-indfb-draw-blt: > - shard-tglb: [PASS][4] -> [INCOMPLETE][5] >[4]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10605/shard-tglb1/igt@kms_frontbuffer_track...@fbc-1p-offscren-pri-indfb-draw-blt.html >[5]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21088/shard-tglb8/i > gt@kms_frontbuffer_track...@fbc-1p-offscren-pri-indfb-draw-blt.html > No clear error seen here. But renaming a function causes no functional change, so definitely not caused by this patch. Applied to drm-intel-gt-next. Thanks for the patch. Matt > > Known issues > > > Here are the changes found in Patchwork_21088_full that come from known > issues: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Issues hit > > * igt@gem_ctx_sseu@engines: > - shard-skl: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][6] ([fdo#109271]) +8 similar issues >[6]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21088/shard-skl9/ig > t@gem_ctx_s...@engines.html > > * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-flow@rcs0: > - shard-tglb: [PASS][7] -> [FAIL][8] ([i915#2842]) +1 similar > issue >[7]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10605/shard-tglb3/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-f...@rcs0.html >[8]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21088/shard-tglb6/i > gt@gem_exec_fair@basic-f...@rcs0.html > > * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace@rcs0: > - shard-kbl: [PASS][9] -> [FAIL][10] ([i915#2842]) >[9]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10605/shard-kbl6/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-p...@rcs0.html >[10]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21088/shard-kbl6/ig > t@gem_exec_fair@basic-p...@rcs0.html > > * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace@vcs0: > - shard-kbl: [PASS][11] -> [SKIP][12] ([fdo#109271]) >[11]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10605/shard-kbl6/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-p...@vcs0.html >[12]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21088/shard-kbl6/ig > t@gem_exec_fair@basic-p...@vcs0.html > > * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace@vcs1: > - shard-iclb: NOTRUN -> [FAIL][13] ([i915#2842]) >[13]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Pat
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for Check SFC fusing on Xe_HP (rev4)
Created a new issue for the regression failures and re-reported.
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/4179
Lakshmi.
-Original Message-
From: Roper, Matthew D
Sent: Monday, September 20, 2021 1:25 PM
To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: Vudum, Lakshminarayana
Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for Check SFC fusing on Xe_HP (rev4)
On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 06:55:52PM +, Patchwork wrote:
> == Series Details ==
>
> Series: Check SFC fusing on Xe_HP (rev4)
> URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/94808/
> State : failure
>
> == Summary ==
>
> CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_10613 -> Patchwork_21099
>
>
> Summary
> ---
>
> **FAILURE**
>
> Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_21099 absolutely need to be
> verified manually.
>
> If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
> introduced in Patchwork_21099, please notify your bug team to allow them
> to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI.
>
> External URL:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21099/index.html
>
> Possible new issues
> ---
>
> Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in
> Patchwork_21099:
>
> ### IGT changes ###
>
> Possible regressions
>
> * igt@i915_module_load@reload:
> - fi-snb-2520m: [PASS][1] -> [INCOMPLETE][2]
>[1]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10613/fi-snb-2520m/igt@i915_module_l...@reload.html
>[2]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21099/fi-snb-2520m/igt@i915_module_l...@reload.html
> - fi-bsw-kefka: [PASS][3] -> [INCOMPLETE][4]
>[3]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10613/fi-bsw-kefka/igt@i915_module_l...@reload.html
>[4]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21099/fi-bsw-kefka/igt@i915_module_l...@reload.html
> - fi-bsw-nick:[PASS][5] -> [INCOMPLETE][6]
>[5]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10613/fi-bsw-nick/igt@i915_module_l...@reload.html
>[6]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21099/fi-bsw-nick/i
> gt@i915_module_l...@reload.html
All three of these are page faults originating from the snd_hda_core code.
There seem to be a lot of problems originating from the sound code that came in
with the 5.15-rc1 merge; these aren't caused by the SFC fusing checks in this
series.
Matt
>
>
> Suppressed
>
> The following results come from untrusted machines, tests, or statuses.
> They do not affect the overall result.
>
> * igt@i915_module_load@reload:
> - {fi-jsl-1}: [INCOMPLETE][7] ([i915#4130]) -> [INCOMPLETE][8]
>[7]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10613/fi-jsl-1/igt@i915_module_l...@reload.html
>[8]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21099/fi-jsl-1/igt@
> i915_module_l...@reload.html
>
>
> Known issues
>
>
> Here are the changes found in Patchwork_21099 that come from known issues:
>
> ### IGT changes ###
>
> Issues hit
>
> * igt@amdgpu/amd_basic@semaphore:
> - fi-bdw-5557u: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][9] ([fdo#109271]) +27 similar
> issues
>[9]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21099/fi-bdw-5557u/
> igt@amdgpu/amd_ba...@semaphore.html
>
> * igt@amdgpu/amd_basic@userptr:
> - fi-bxt-dsi: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][10] ([fdo#109271]) +17 similar
> issues
>[10]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21099/fi-bxt-dsi/ig
> t@amdgpu/amd_ba...@userptr.html
>
> * igt@amdgpu/amd_cs_nop@fork-gfx0:
> - fi-icl-u2: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][11] ([fdo#109315]) +17 similar
> issues
>[11]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21099/fi-icl-u2/igt
> @amdgpu/amd_cs_...@fork-gfx0.html
>
> * igt@amdgpu/amd_cs_nop@sync-gfx0:
> - fi-rkl-11600: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][12] ([fdo#109315]) +17 similar
> issues
>[12]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21099/fi-rkl-11600/
> igt@amdgpu/amd_cs_...@sync-gfx0.html
>
> * igt@core_hotunplug@unbind-rebind:
> - fi-tgl-1115g4: NOTRUN -> [INCOMPLETE][13] ([i915#4130])
>[13]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21099/fi-tgl-1115g4/igt@core_hotunp...@unbind-rebind.html
> - fi-kbl-7567u: [PASS][14] -> [INCOMPLETE][15] ([i915#4130])
>[14]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10613/fi-kbl-7567u/igt@core_hotunp...@unbind-rebind.html
>
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915: Update memory bandwidth parameters (rev2)
Created two issues and re-reported. My apologies for the delay. https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/4184 https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/4185 Lakshmi. -Original Message- From: Roper, Matthew D Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2021 1:46 PM To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org Cc: Sripada, Radhakrishna ; Vudum, Lakshminarayana ; Kijanczuk, Damian Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915: Update memory bandwidth parameters (rev2) On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 03:28:44AM +, Patchwork wrote: > == Series Details == > > Series: drm/i915: Update memory bandwidth parameters (rev2) > URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/94620/ > State : failure > > == Summary == > > CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_10586_full -> Patchwork_21051_full > > > Summary > --- > > **FAILURE** > > Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_21051_full absolutely need to > be > verified manually. > > If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes > introduced in Patchwork_21051_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_21051_full: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Possible regressions > > * igt@gen9_exec_parse@basic-rejected: > - shard-iclb: NOTRUN -> [INCOMPLETE][1] +1 similar issue >[1]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21051/shard-iclb8/i > gt@gen9_exec_pa...@basic-rejected.html <0>[ 413.504583] NMI watchdog: Watchdog detected hard LOCKUP on cpu 4 and the CPU seems to be in a snd_hda_core interrupt handler at the time. Issue not caused by adjusting the display memory bandwidth calculation here. > > * igt@kms_flip_scaled_crc@flip-32bpp-ytile-to-32bpp-ytileccs: > - shard-iclb: [PASS][2] -> [SKIP][3] >[2]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10586/shard-iclb7/igt@kms_flip_scaled_...@flip-32bpp-ytile-to-32bpp-ytileccs.html >[3]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21051/shard-iclb2/i > gt@kms_flip_scaled_...@flip-32bpp-ytile-to-32bpp-ytileccs.html An ICL equivalent of https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/3701 > > * igt@kms_pipe_crc_basic@suspend-read-crc-pipe-d: > - shard-tglb: [PASS][4] -> [INCOMPLETE][5] >[4]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10586/shard-tglb5/igt@kms_pipe_crc_ba...@suspend-read-crc-pipe-d.html >[5]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21051/shard-tglb7/i > gt@kms_pipe_crc_ba...@suspend-read-crc-pipe-d.html System never returned from s2idle. https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/456 Applied to drm-intel-next. Thanks for the patch. Matt > > > Known issues > > > Here are the changes found in Patchwork_21051_full that come from known > issues: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Issues hit > > * igt@feature_discovery@display-2x: > - shard-tglb: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][6] ([i915#1839]) >[6]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21051/shard-tglb2/i > gt@feature_discov...@display-2x.html > > * igt@gem_eio@in-flight-contexts-1us: > - shard-tglb: [PASS][7] -> [TIMEOUT][8] ([i915#3063]) >[7]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10586/shard-tglb8/igt@gem_...@in-flight-contexts-1us.html >[8]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21051/shard-tglb3/i > gt@gem_...@in-flight-contexts-1us.html > > * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace-share@rcs0: > - shard-tglb: NOTRUN -> [FAIL][9] ([i915#2842]) >[9]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21051/shard-tglb1/i > gt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace-sh...@rcs0.html > > * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace@rcs0: > - shard-tglb: [PASS][10] -> [FAIL][11] ([i915#2842]) >[10]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10586/shard-tglb6/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-p...@rcs0.html >[11]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21051/shard-tglb1/i > gt@gem_exec_fair@basic-p...@rcs0.html > > * igt@gem_huc_copy@huc-copy: > - shard-tglb: [PASS][12] -> [SKIP][13] ([i915#2190]) >[12]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10586/shard-tglb8/igt@gem_huc_c...@huc-copy.html >[13]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21051/shard-tglb7/i > gt@gem_huc_c...@huc-cop
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for i915: Simplify mmio handling & add new DG2 shadow table (rev2)
Created https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/4186 and re-reported
the series.
Lakshmi.
-Original Message-
From: Roper, Matthew D
Sent: Friday, September 10, 2021 2:10 PM
To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: Vudum, Lakshminarayana ; Kijanczuk, Damian
Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for i915: Simplify mmio handling & add new
DG2 shadow table (rev2)
On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 08:56:20PM +, Patchwork wrote:
> == Series Details ==
>
> Series: i915: Simplify mmio handling & add new DG2 shadow table (rev2)
> URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/94534/
> State : failure
>
> == Summary ==
>
> CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_10570 -> Patchwork_21017
>
>
> Summary
> ---
>
> **FAILURE**
>
> Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_21017 absolutely need to be
> verified manually.
>
> If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
> introduced in Patchwork_21017, please notify your bug team to allow them
> to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI.
>
> External URL:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21017/index.html
>
> Possible new issues
> ---
>
> Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in
> Patchwork_21017:
>
> ### IGT changes ###
>
> Possible regressions
>
> * igt@kms_busy@basic:
> - fi-rkl-guc: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][1]
>[1]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21017/fi-rkl-guc/ig
> t@kms_b...@basic.html
KMS test skip due to no suitable display; not related to the uncore mmio
changes in this series.
Matt
>
>
> Known issues
>
>
> Here are the changes found in Patchwork_21017 that come from known issues:
>
> ### IGT changes ###
>
> Issues hit
>
> * igt@gem_exec_suspend@basic-s3:
> - fi-tgl-1115g4: [PASS][2] -> [FAIL][3] ([i915#1888])
>[2]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10570/fi-tgl-1115g4/igt@gem_exec_susp...@basic-s3.html
>[3]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21017/fi-tgl-1115g4
> /igt@gem_exec_susp...@basic-s3.html
>
> * igt@runner@aborted:
> - fi-kbl-7500u: NOTRUN -> [FAIL][4] ([i915#1814] / [i915#3363])
>[4]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21017/fi-kbl-7500u/
> igt@run...@aborted.html
>
>
> Possible fixes
>
> * igt@i915_pm_rpm@module-reload:
> - {fi-hsw-gt1}: [INCOMPLETE][5] ([i915#151]) -> [PASS][6]
>[5]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10570/fi-hsw-gt1/igt@i915_pm_...@module-reload.html
>[6]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21017/fi-hsw-gt1/ig
> t@i915_pm_...@module-reload.html
>
> * igt@kms_flip@basic-flip-vs-modeset@c-dp1:
> - fi-cfl-8109u: [FAIL][7] -> [PASS][8] +1 similar issue
>[7]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10570/fi-cfl-8109u/igt@kms_flip@basic-flip-vs-mode...@c-dp1.html
>[8]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21017/fi-cfl-8109u/
> igt@kms_flip@basic-flip-vs-mode...@c-dp1.html
>
> * igt@kms_flip@basic-flip-vs-wf_vblank@a-vga1:
> - fi-bwr-2160:[FAIL][9] ([i915#2122]) -> [PASS][10]
>[9]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10570/fi-bwr-2160/igt@kms_flip@basic-flip-vs-wf_vbl...@a-vga1.html
>[10]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21017/fi-bwr-2160/i
> gt@kms_flip@basic-flip-vs-wf_vbl...@a-vga1.html
>
> * igt@kms_pipe_crc_basic@compare-crc-sanitycheck-pipe-b:
> - fi-cfl-8109u: [DMESG-WARN][11] ([i915#295]) -> [PASS][12] +18
> similar issues
>[11]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10570/fi-cfl-8109u/igt@kms_pipe_crc_ba...@compare-crc-sanitycheck-pipe-b.html
>[12]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21017/fi-cfl-8109u/
> igt@kms_pipe_crc_ba...@compare-crc-sanitycheck-pipe-b.html
>
>
> {name}: This element is suppressed. This means it is ignored when computing
> the status of the difference (SUCCESS, WARNING, or FAILURE).
>
> [fdo#109271]: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109271
> [fdo#109315]: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109315
> [i915#151]: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/151
> [i915#1814]: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/1814
> [i915#1888]: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/1888
> [i915#2122]: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/is
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for i915: Simplify mmio handling & add new DG2 shadow table (rev3)
Few comments below. -Original Message- From: Roper, Matthew D Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2021 3:06 PM To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org Cc: Vudum, Lakshminarayana Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for i915: Simplify mmio handling & add new DG2 shadow table (rev3) On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 09:32:18PM +, Patchwork wrote: > == Series Details == > > Series: i915: Simplify mmio handling & add new DG2 shadow table (rev3) > URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/94534/ > State : failure > > == Summary == > > CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_10619_full -> Patchwork_21114_full > > > Summary > --- > > **FAILURE** > > Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_21114_full absolutely need to > be > verified manually. > > If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes > introduced in Patchwork_21114_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_21114_full: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Possible regressions > > * igt@gem_softpin@noreloc-s3: > - shard-apl: NOTRUN -> [INCOMPLETE][1] >[1]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21114/shard-apl7/ig > t@gem_soft...@noreloc-s3.html Looks like the system just never came back from S3. Do we need an APL equivalent of fdo#2199? [Lakshmi] I filed #4186 for APL. > > * igt@i915_suspend@forcewake: > - shard-skl: [PASS][2] -> [DMESG-WARN][3] >[2]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10619/shard-skl5/igt@i915_susp...@forcewake.html >[3]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21114/shard-skl6/ig > t@i915_susp...@forcewake.html <4> [550.501456] Delta way too big! 18446743503667205104 ts=18446744053597184727 before=549929979623 after=549929979623 write stamp=18446744053597184727 If you just came from a suspend/resume, please switch to the trace global clock: echo global > /sys/kernel/debug/tracing/trace_clock or add trace_clock=global to the kernel command line We've seen this before on other systems and I believe we made the kernel command line change in CI as recommended by the warning message. Looks like we also have https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/3848 for this warning on other tests. [Lakshmi] Correct this failure is related to #3848. Matt > > > Known issues > > > Here are the changes found in Patchwork_21114_full that come from known > issues: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Issues hit > > * igt@device_reset@unbind-reset-rebind: > - shard-kbl: [PASS][4] -> [DMESG-WARN][5] ([i915#4130] / > [i915#4136]) >[4]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10619/shard-kbl4/igt@device_re...@unbind-reset-rebind.html >[5]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21114/shard-kbl6/ig > t@device_re...@unbind-reset-rebind.html > > * igt@feature_discovery@psr2: > - shard-iclb: [PASS][6] -> [SKIP][7] ([i915#658]) >[6]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10619/shard-iclb2/igt@feature_discov...@psr2.html >[7]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21114/shard-iclb7/i > gt@feature_discov...@psr2.html > > * igt@gem_ctx_persistence@process: > - shard-snb: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][8] ([fdo#109271] / [i915#1099]) +4 > similar issues >[8]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21114/shard-snb2/ig > t@gem_ctx_persiste...@process.html > > * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-deadline: > - shard-apl: NOTRUN -> [FAIL][9] ([i915#2846]) >[9]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21114/shard-apl3/ig > t@gem_exec_f...@basic-deadline.html > > * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-share@rcs0: > - shard-tglb: [PASS][10] -> [FAIL][11] ([i915#2842]) >[10]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10619/shard-tglb6/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-sh...@rcs0.html >[11]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21114/shard-tglb3/i > gt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-sh...@rcs0.html > > * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-throttle@rcs0: > - shard-glk: [PASS][12] -> [FAIL][13] ([i915#2842]) +1 similar > issue >[12]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10619/shard-glk8/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-throt...@rcs0.html >[13]: > https:/
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915: Suspend / resume backup- and restore of LMEM. (rev9)
Failure is related to https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/3797. I have re-reported the results after updating the CI bug log filters. Lakshmi. From: Thomas Hellström Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2021 11:07 AM To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Vudum, Lakshminarayana Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915: Suspend / resume backup- and restore of LMEM. (rev9) On 9/22/21 11:05 AM, Patchwork wrote: Patch Details Series: drm/i915: Suspend / resume backup- and restore of LMEM. (rev9) URL: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/94278/ State: failure Details: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21124/index.html CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_10622_full -> Patchwork_21124_full Summary FAILURE Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_21124_full absolutely need to be verified manually. If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes introduced in Patchwork_21124_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_21124_full: IGT changes Possible regressions * igt@gem_exec_schedule@u-submit-golden-slice@rcs0: * shard-tglb: PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10622/shard-tglb3/igt@gem_exec_schedule@u-submit-golden-sl...@rcs0.html> -> INCOMPLETE<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21124/shard-tglb6/igt@gem_exec_schedule@u-submit-golden-sl...@rcs0.html> Lakshmi, this failure is unrelated. The igt@gem_exec_schedule@u-submit-golden-slice plus some other subtests have been broken since igt commit a9987a8d tests/i915/gem_exec_schedule: Convert to intel_ctx_t (v3) Although the tests typically says SUCCESS, it's because they typically are interrupted by the watchdog and move on. Thanks, Thomas
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915/tc: Fix TypeC connect/disconnect sequences (rev8)
I have addressed the regressions and I filed below issues https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/4225 igt@gem_eio@reset-stress - fail - Failed assertion: count > 2 https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/4224 igt@kms_async_flips@crc - fail - Failed assertion: !mismatch || igt_skip_crc_compare Lakshmi, -Original Message- From: Deak, Imre Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2021 2:17 PM To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Souza, Jose ; Vudum, Lakshminarayana Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915/tc: Fix TypeC connect/disconnect sequences (rev8) On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 04:58:46PM +, Patchwork wrote: > == Series Details == > > Series: drm/i915/tc: Fix TypeC connect/disconnect sequences (rev8) > URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/94878/ > State : failure > > == Summary == > > CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_10660_full -> Patchwork_21189_full > > > Summary > --- > > **FAILURE** > > Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_21189_full absolutely need to > be > verified manually. > > If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes > introduced in Patchwork_21189_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_21189_full: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Possible regressions > > * igt@fbdev@unaligned-read: > - shard-glk: [PASS][1] -> [FAIL][2] >[1]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10660/shard-glk3/igt@fb...@unaligned-read.html >[2]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21189/shard-glk4/ig > t@fb...@unaligned-read.html > > * igt@gem_eio@reset-stress: > - shard-skl: [PASS][3] -> [FAIL][4] >[3]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10660/shard-skl1/igt@gem_...@reset-stress.html >[4]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21189/shard-skl2/ig > t@gem_...@reset-stress.html > > * igt@kms_async_flips@crc: > - shard-skl: NOTRUN -> [FAIL][5] >[5]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21189/shard-skl7/ig > t@kms_async_fl...@crc.html The above platforms don't have any TypeC ports, so the failures are unrelated. Thanks for the review, I pushed the patchset to drm-intel-next. > Known issues > > > Here are the changes found in Patchwork_21189_full that come from known > issues: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Issues hit > > * igt@gem_create@create-massive: > - shard-apl: NOTRUN -> [DMESG-WARN][6] ([i915#3002]) >[6]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21189/shard-apl6/ig > t@gem_cre...@create-massive.html > > * igt@gem_ctx_sseu@mmap-args: > - shard-tglb: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][7] ([i915#280]) >[7]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21189/shard-tglb2/i > gt@gem_ctx_s...@mmap-args.html > > * igt@gem_eio@unwedge-stress: > - shard-iclb: [PASS][8] -> [TIMEOUT][9] ([i915#2369] / > [i915#2481] / [i915#3070]) >[8]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10660/shard-iclb7/igt@gem_...@unwedge-stress.html >[9]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21189/shard-iclb3/i > gt@gem_...@unwedge-stress.html > > * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-deadline: > - shard-glk: [PASS][10] -> [FAIL][11] ([i915#2846]) >[10]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10660/shard-glk8/igt@gem_exec_f...@basic-deadline.html >[11]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21189/shard-glk1/ig > t@gem_exec_f...@basic-deadline.html > > * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-flow@rcs0: > - shard-skl: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][12] ([fdo#109271]) +106 similar > issues >[12]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21189/shard-skl1/ig > t@gem_exec_fair@basic-f...@rcs0.html > > * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-share@rcs0: > - shard-tglb: [PASS][13] -> [FAIL][14] ([i915#2842]) +1 similar > issue >[13]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10660/shard-tglb1/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-sh...@rcs0.html >[14]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21189/shard-tglb6/i > gt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-sh...@rcs0.html > > * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-vip@rcs0: > - shard-kbl: [PASS][15] -> [FAIL][16] ([i915#284
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915/adlp: Add workaround to disable CMTG clock gating
Re-reported the series.
-Original Message-
From: Deak, Imre
Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2021 6:34 AM
To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Souza, Jose ; Vudum,
Lakshminarayana
Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915/adlp: Add workaround to disable
CMTG clock gating
On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 10:51:22PM +, Patchwork wrote:
> == Series Details ==
>
> Series: drm/i915/adlp: Add workaround to disable CMTG clock gating
> URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/93067/
> State : failure
Thanks for the review pushed to -din with the checkpatch errors fixed.
The failure on TGL is unrelated.
> == Summary ==
>
> CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_10404_full -> Patchwork_20716_full
>
>
> Summary
> ---
>
> **FAILURE**
>
> Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_20716_full absolutely need to
> be
> verified manually.
>
> If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
> introduced in Patchwork_20716_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_20716_full:
>
> ### IGT changes ###
>
> Possible regressions
>
> * igt@gem_exec_schedule@independent@vcs1:
> - shard-tglb: [PASS][1] -> [FAIL][2]
>[1]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10404/shard-tglb1/igt@gem_exec_schedule@independ...@vcs1.html
>[2]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20716/shard-tglb6/i
> gt@gem_exec_schedule@independ...@vcs1.html
>
>
> Suppressed
>
> The following results come from untrusted machines, tests, or statuses.
> They do not affect the overall result.
>
> * igt@kms_vblank@pipe-c-ts-continuation-dpms-suspend:
> - {shard-rkl}:[SKIP][3] ([i915#1845]) -> [DMESG-WARN][4]
>[3]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10404/shard-rkl-1/igt@kms_vbl...@pipe-c-ts-continuation-dpms-suspend.html
>[4]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20716/shard-rkl-6/i
> gt@kms_vbl...@pipe-c-ts-continuation-dpms-suspend.html
>
> * igt@runner@aborted:
> - {shard-rkl}:([FAIL][5], [FAIL][6], [FAIL][7], [FAIL][8])
> ([i915#2029] / [i915#3002] / [i915#3810] / [i915#3811]) -> ([FAIL][9],
> [FAIL][10], [FAIL][11], [FAIL][12], [FAIL][13]) ([i915#2029] / [i915#3002] /
> [i915#3621] / [i915#3810] / [i915#3811])
>[5]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10404/shard-rkl-6/igt@run...@aborted.html
>[6]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10404/shard-rkl-1/igt@run...@aborted.html
>[7]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10404/shard-rkl-5/igt@run...@aborted.html
>[8]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10404/shard-rkl-2/igt@run...@aborted.html
>[9]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20716/shard-rkl-1/igt@run...@aborted.html
>[10]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20716/shard-rkl-6/igt@run...@aborted.html
>[11]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20716/shard-rkl-2/igt@run...@aborted.html
>[12]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20716/shard-rkl-6/igt@run...@aborted.html
>[13]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20716/shard-rkl-6/i
> gt@run...@aborted.html
>
>
> Known issues
>
>
> Here are the changes found in Patchwork_20716_full that come from known
> issues:
>
> ### IGT changes ###
>
> Issues hit
>
> * igt@gem_ctx_persistence@engines-hostile-preempt:
> - shard-snb: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][14] ([fdo#109271] / [i915#1099])
> +6 similar issues
>[14]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20716/shard-snb7/ig
> t@gem_ctx_persiste...@engines-hostile-preempt.html
>
> * igt@gem_eio@in-flight-suspend:
> - shard-kbl: [PASS][15] -> [INCOMPLETE][16] ([i915#155])
>[15]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10404/shard-kbl7/igt@gem_...@in-flight-suspend.html
>[16]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20716/shard-kbl3/ig
> t@gem_...@in-flight-suspend.html
>
> * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-deadline:
> - shard-glk: [PASS][17] -> [FAIL][18] ([i915#2846])
>[17]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10404/shard-glk1/igt@gem_exec_f...@basic-deadline.html
>[18]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/d
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for lpsp with hdmi/dp outputs (rev2)
Re-reported.
From: Gupta, Anshuman
Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2021 10:06 AM
To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Vudum, Lakshminarayana
Subject: RE: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for lpsp with hdmi/dp outputs (rev2)
Hi Lakshmi ,
Below failures are not related to my series.
* igt@kms_selftest@all@damage_iter_no_damage:
* shard-apl: NOTRUN ->
INCOMPLETE<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20723/shard-apl1/igt@kms_selftest@all@damage_iter_no_damage.html>
Could you please raise the issue and rereport the run.
Thanks,
Anshuman Gupta.
From: Patchwork
mailto:patchw...@emeril.freedesktop.org>>
Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2021 10:17 PM
To: Gupta, Anshuman mailto:anshuman.gu...@intel.com>>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org<mailto:intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
Subject: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for lpsp with hdmi/dp outputs (rev2)
Patch Details
Series:
lpsp with hdmi/dp outputs (rev2)
URL:
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/92108/
State:
failure
Details:
https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20723/index.html
CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_10410_full -> Patchwork_20723_full
Summary
FAILURE
Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_20723_full absolutely need to be
verified manually.
If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
introduced in Patchwork_20723_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_20723_full:
IGT changes
Possible regressions
* igt@kms_selftest@all@damage_iter_no_damage:
* shard-apl: NOTRUN ->
INCOMPLETE<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20723/shard-apl1/igt@kms_selftest@all@damage_iter_no_damage.html>
Suppressed
The following results come from untrusted machines, tests, or statuses.
They do not affect the overall result.
* igt@runner@aborted:
* {shard-rkl}:
(FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10410/shard-rkl-1/igt@run...@aborted.html>,
FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10410/shard-rkl-2/igt@run...@aborted.html>,
FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10410/shard-rkl-5/igt@run...@aborted.html>,
FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10410/shard-rkl-2/igt@run...@aborted.html>)
([i915#3002] / [i915#3810] / [i915#3811]) ->
(FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20723/shard-rkl-1/igt@run...@aborted.html>,
FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20723/shard-rkl-5/igt@run...@aborted.html>,
FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20723/shard-rkl-6/igt@run...@aborted.html>)
([i915#3002] / [i915#3810])
Known issues
Here are the changes found in Patchwork_20723_full that come from known issues:
IGT changes
Issues hit
* igt@gem_ctx_persistence@idempotent:
* shard-snb: NOTRUN ->
SKIP<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20723/shard-snb6/igt@gem_ctx_persiste...@idempotent.html>
([fdo#109271] / [i915#1099]) +3 similar issues
* igt@gem_eio@in-flight-suspend:
* shard-kbl:
PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10410/shard-kbl1/igt@gem_...@in-flight-suspend.html>
->
INCOMPLETE<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20723/shard-kbl4/igt@gem_...@in-flight-suspend.html>
([i915#155])
* igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-deadline:
* shard-apl: NOTRUN ->
FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20723/shard-apl1/igt@gem_exec_f...@basic-deadline.html>
([i915#2846])
* igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-rrul@rcs0:
* shard-tglb: NOTRUN ->
FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20723/shard-tglb3/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-r...@rcs0.html>
([i915#2842])
* igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-share@rcs0:
* shard-tglb:
PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10410/shard-tglb7/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-sh...@rcs0.html>
->
FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20723/shard-tglb3/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-sh...@rcs0.html>
([i915#2842])
* igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace@vcs1:
* shard-iclb: NOTRUN ->
FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20723/shard-iclb4/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-p...@vcs1.html>
([i915#2842])
* igt@gem_huc_copy@huc-copy:
* shard-kbl: NOTRUN ->
SKIP<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20723/shard-kbl2/igt@gem_huc_c...@huc-copy.html>
([fdo#109271] / [i915#2190])
* igt@gem_pread@exhaustion:
* shard-apl: NOTRUN ->
WARN<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20723/shard-apl6/igt@gem_pr...@exhaustion.html>
([i915#2658])
* igt@gem_pwrite@basic-exhaustion:
* shard-kb
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for lpsp with hdmi/dp outputs
Re-reported. -Original Message- From: Deak, Imre Sent: Monday, August 2, 2021 4:23 AM To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Gupta, Anshuman ; Vudum, Lakshminarayana Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for lpsp with hdmi/dp outputs On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 10:27:29PM +, Patchwork wrote: > == Series Details == > > Series: lpsp with hdmi/dp outputs > URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/93179/ > State : failure Thanks for the patch pushed it to -din, fixing some typos in the commit message and the playback domain name while applying. The SKL failure looks unrelated, since nothing changes there, maybe we are only missing the trace_clock=global kernel param on that machine. > > == Summary == > > CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_10418_full -> Patchwork_20740_full > > > Summary > --- > > **FAILURE** > > Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_20740_full absolutely need to > be > verified manually. > > If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes > introduced in Patchwork_20740_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_20740_full: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Possible regressions > > * igt@kms_pipe_crc_basic@suspend-read-crc-pipe-a: > - shard-skl: [PASS][1] -> [DMESG-WARN][2] >[1]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10418/shard-skl6/igt@kms_pipe_crc_ba...@suspend-read-crc-pipe-a.html >[2]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20740/shard-skl1/ig > t@kms_pipe_crc_ba...@suspend-read-crc-pipe-a.html > > > Known issues > > > Here are the changes found in Patchwork_20740_full that come from known > issues: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Issues hit > > * igt@gem_ctx_persistence@smoketest: > - shard-snb: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][3] ([fdo#109271] / [i915#1099]) +5 > similar issues >[3]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20740/shard-snb6/ig > t@gem_ctx_persiste...@smoketest.html > > * igt@gem_eio@reset-stress: > - shard-skl: [PASS][4] -> [FAIL][5] ([i915#2771]) >[4]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10418/shard-skl1/igt@gem_...@reset-stress.html >[5]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20740/shard-skl4/ig > t@gem_...@reset-stress.html > > * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace@bcs0: > - shard-iclb: [PASS][6] -> [FAIL][7] ([i915#2842]) >[6]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10418/shard-iclb7/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-p...@bcs0.html >[7]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20740/shard-iclb6/i > gt@gem_exec_fair@basic-p...@bcs0.html > > * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-throttle@rcs0: > - shard-glk: [PASS][8] -> [FAIL][9] ([i915#2842]) >[8]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10418/shard-glk7/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-throt...@rcs0.html >[9]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20740/shard-glk1/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-throt...@rcs0.html > - shard-iclb: [PASS][10] -> [FAIL][11] ([i915#2849]) >[10]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10418/shard-iclb6/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-throt...@rcs0.html >[11]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20740/shard-iclb4/i > gt@gem_exec_fair@basic-throt...@rcs0.html > > * igt@gem_huc_copy@huc-copy: > - shard-tglb: [PASS][12] -> [SKIP][13] ([i915#2190]) >[12]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10418/shard-tglb5/igt@gem_huc_c...@huc-copy.html >[13]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20740/shard-tglb6/igt@gem_huc_c...@huc-copy.html > - shard-apl: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][14] ([fdo#109271] / [i915#2190]) >[14]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20740/shard-apl2/ig > t@gem_huc_c...@huc-copy.html > > * igt@gem_mmap_gtt@cpuset-big-copy-odd: > - shard-glk: [PASS][15] -> [FAIL][16] ([i915#1888] / [i915#307]) >[15]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10418/shard-glk8/igt@gem_mmap_...@cpuset-big-copy-odd.html >[16]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20740/shard-glk1/ig > t@gem_mmap_...@cpuset-big-copy-odd.html > > * igt@gem_pread@exhaustion: > - shard-apl: NOTRUN ->
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for fbdev/efifb: Release PCI device's runtime PM ref during FB destroy (rev2)
Filed a new bug for the skip and re-reported. Lakshmi. -Original Message- From: Deak, Imre Sent: Monday, August 9, 2021 8:13 AM To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Vudum, Lakshminarayana Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for fbdev/efifb: Release PCI device's runtime PM ref during FB destroy (rev2) Hi Lakshmi, On Mon, Aug 09, 2021 at 02:49:24PM +, Patchwork wrote: > [...] > Possible regressions > > * igt@kms_pipe_crc_basic@compare-crc-sanitycheck-pipe-a: > - fi-rkl-11600: [PASS][1] -> [SKIP][2] >[1]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10460/fi-rkl-11600/igt@kms_pipe_crc_ba...@compare-crc-sanitycheck-pipe-a.html >[2]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20786/fi-rkl-11600/ > igt@kms_pipe_crc_ba...@compare-crc-sanitycheck-pipe-a.html The skip is due to the monitor disconnecting itself at: <7>[ 110.708337] [IGT] kms_force_connector_basic: exiting, ret=0 ... <7>[ 110.750522] i915 :00:02.0: [drm:gen8_de_irq_handler [i915]] hotplug event received, stat 0x0002, dig 0x00a0, pins 0x0020, long 0x0020 ... <7>[ 110.750915] [drm:intel_encoder_hotplug [i915]] [CONNECTOR:185:HDMI-A-1] status updated from connected to disconnected (epoch counter 15->16) and only re-appearing at: <7>[ 110.892384] [IGT] kms_pipe_crc_basic: starting subtest compare-crc-sanitycheck-pipe-A <7>[ 110.892657] [IGT] kms_pipe_crc_basic: exiting, ret=77 ... <7>[ 110.948844] i915 :00:02.0: [drm:gen8_de_irq_handler [i915]] hotplug event received, stat 0x0002, dig 0x00a0, pins 0x0020, long 0x0020 ... <7>[ 110.969382] [drm:drm_helper_probe_single_connector_modes] [CONNECTOR:185:HDMI-A-1] status updated from disconnected to connected Possibly the monitor entering/exiting some power saving state when IGT doesn't expect this. The patch only affects runtime PM, re-enabling the runtime suspend functionality, but the first runtime suspend happens only at: <7>[ 122.366611] i915 :00:02.0: [drm:intel_runtime_suspend [i915]] Device suspended so I can't see how the changes are related to the skip. > Known issues > > > Here are the changes found in Patchwork_20786 that come from known issues: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Issues hit > > * igt@amdgpu/amd_cs_nop@fork-gfx0: > - fi-icl-u2: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][3] ([fdo#109315]) +17 similar > issues >[3]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20786/fi-icl-u2/igt > @amdgpu/amd_cs_...@fork-gfx0.html > > * igt@gem_exec_suspend@basic-s0: > - fi-tgl-1115g4: [PASS][4] -> [FAIL][5] ([i915#1888]) >[4]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10460/fi-tgl-1115g4/igt@gem_exec_susp...@basic-s0.html >[5]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20786/fi-tgl-1115g4 > /igt@gem_exec_susp...@basic-s0.html > > * igt@kms_frontbuffer_tracking@basic: > - fi-rkl-11600: [PASS][6] -> [SKIP][7] ([i915#3180]) >[6]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10460/fi-rkl-11600/igt@kms_frontbuffer_track...@basic.html >[7]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20786/fi-rkl-11600/ > igt@kms_frontbuffer_track...@basic.html > > > Possible fixes > > * igt@gem_exec_suspend@basic-s3: > - fi-tgl-1115g4: [FAIL][8] ([i915#1888]) -> [PASS][9] >[8]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10460/fi-tgl-1115g4/igt@gem_exec_susp...@basic-s3.html >[9]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20786/fi-tgl-1115g4 > /igt@gem_exec_susp...@basic-s3.html > > * igt@i915_pm_rpm@basic-pci-d3-state: > - fi-glk-dsi: [SKIP][10] ([fdo#109271]) -> [PASS][11] +1 similar > issue >[10]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10460/fi-glk-dsi/igt@i915_pm_...@basic-pci-d3-state.html >[11]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20786/fi-glk-dsi/igt@i915_pm_...@basic-pci-d3-state.html > - fi-icl-u2: [SKIP][12] ([i915#579]) -> [PASS][13] +1 similar > issue >[12]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10460/fi-icl-u2/igt@i915_pm_...@basic-pci-d3-state.html >[13]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20786/fi-icl-u2/igt@i915_pm_...@basic-pci-d3-state.html > - fi-kbl-7500u: [SKIP][14] ([fdo#109271]) -> [PASS][15] +1 similar > issue >[14]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10460/fi-kbl-7500u/igt@i915_pm_...@basic-pci-d3-state.html >[15]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20786/fi-kbl-7500u/igt@i915_pm_...@basic-pci-d3-state.html > - fi-kbl-soraka: [SKIP][16] (
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for fbdev/efifb: Release PCI device's runtime PM ref during FB destroy (rev2)
Re-reported.
-Original Message-
From: Deak, Imre
Sent: Monday, August 9, 2021 10:57 AM
To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Vudum, Lakshminarayana
Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for fbdev/efifb: Release PCI device's runtime
PM ref during FB destroy (rev2)
Hi,
On Mon, Aug 09, 2021 at 05:23:59PM +, Patchwork wrote:
> [...]
> * igt@i915_selftest@live@hangcheck:
> - shard-snb: [PASS][1] -> [INCOMPLETE][2]
>[1]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10460/shard-snb2/igt@i915_selftest@l...@hangcheck.html
>[2]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20786/shard-snb6/igt@i915_selftest@l...@hangcheck.html
no EFI FB on this machine, so the patch should have no effect on it.
--Imre
> Suppressed
>
> The following results come from untrusted machines, tests, or statuses.
> They do not affect the overall result.
>
> * {igt@i915_pm_rpm@gem-mmap-type@fixed}:
> - shard-tglb: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][3]
>[3]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20786/shard-tglb5/igt@i915_pm_rpm@gem-mmap-t...@fixed.html
> - shard-iclb: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][4]
>[4]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20786/shard-iclb5/igt@i915_pm_rpm@gem-mmap-t...@fixed.html
>
>
> Known issues
>
>
> Here are the changes found in Patchwork_20786_full that come from known
> issues:
>
> ### IGT changes ###
>
> Issues hit
>
> * igt@gem_ctx_persistence@legacy-engines-mixed:
> - shard-snb: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][5] ([fdo#109271] / [i915#1099]) +1
> similar issue
>[5]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20786/shard-snb5/igt@gem_ctx_persiste...@legacy-engines-mixed.html
>
> * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-deadline:
> - shard-kbl: NOTRUN -> [FAIL][6] ([i915#2846])
>[6]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20786/shard-kbl2/igt@gem_exec_f...@basic-deadline.html
> - shard-glk: [PASS][7] -> [FAIL][8] ([i915#2846])
>[7]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10460/shard-glk3/igt@gem_exec_f...@basic-deadline.html
>[8]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20786/shard-glk6/igt@gem_exec_f...@basic-deadline.html
>
> * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none@vcs0:
> - shard-apl: [PASS][9] -> [FAIL][10] ([i915#2842])
>[9]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10460/shard-apl7/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-n...@vcs0.html
>[10]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20786/shard-apl2/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-n...@vcs0.html
>
> * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace-share@rcs0:
> - shard-glk: [PASS][11] -> [FAIL][12] ([i915#2842])
>[11]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10460/shard-glk9/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace-sh...@rcs0.html
>[12]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20786/shard-glk1/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace-sh...@rcs0.html
>
> * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-throttle@rcs0:
> - shard-iclb: [PASS][13] -> [FAIL][14] ([i915#2849])
>[13]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10460/shard-iclb4/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-throt...@rcs0.html
>[14]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20786/shard-iclb2/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-throt...@rcs0.html
>
> * igt@gem_pwrite@basic-exhaustion:
> - shard-snb: NOTRUN -> [WARN][15] ([i915#2658])
>[15]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20786/shard-snb6/igt@gem_pwr...@basic-exhaustion.html
> - shard-apl: NOTRUN -> [WARN][16] ([i915#2658])
>[16]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20786/shard-apl1/igt@gem_pwr...@basic-exhaustion.html
>
> * igt@gem_softpin@noreloc-s3:
> - shard-kbl: [PASS][17] -> [DMESG-WARN][18] ([i915#180]) +1
> similar issue
>[17]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10460/shard-kbl4/igt@gem_soft...@noreloc-s3.html
>[18]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20786/shard-kbl6/igt@gem_soft...@noreloc-s3.html
>
> * igt@gen7_exec_parse@basic-offset:
> - shard-apl: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][19] ([fdo#109271]) +167 similar
> issues
>[19]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20786/shard-apl1/igt@gen7_exec_pa...@basic-offset.html
>
> * igt@kms_big_fb@x-tiled-max-hw-stride-64bpp-rotate-0-hflip:
> - shard-kbl: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][20] ([fdo#109271] / [i915#3777])
> +1 similar issue
>[20]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20786/shard-kbl1/igt@kms_big...@x-tiled-max-hw-stride-64bpp-ro
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for Tweaked Wa_14010685332 for all PCHs
Re-reported. -Original Message- From: Gupta, Anshuman Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2021 8:23 AM To: Vudum, Lakshminarayana Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for Tweaked Wa_14010685332 for all PCHs On 2021-08-10 at 13:57:29 +, Patchwork wrote: > == Series Details == > > Series: Tweaked Wa_14010685332 for all PCHs > URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/93548/ > State : failure > > == Summary == > > CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_10464 -> Patchwork_20792 > > > Summary > --- > > **FAILURE** > > Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_20792 absolutely need to be > verified manually. > > If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes > introduced in Patchwork_20792, please notify your bug team to allow them > to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI. > > External URL: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20792/index.html > > Possible new issues > --- > > Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in > Patchwork_20792: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Possible regressions > > * igt@core_hotunplug@unbind-rebind: > - fi-rkl-guc: NOTRUN -> [DMESG-WARN][1] >[1]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20792/fi-rkl-guc/ig > t@core_hotunp...@unbind-rebind.html Hi Lakshmi , Above CI BAT failure is a unrealted failure(not realted to display), it seems related to core power. could you plese create the issue and re-report the result. Thanks, Anshuman Gupta. > > > Known issues > > > Here are the changes found in Patchwork_20792 that come from known issues: > > ### CI changes ### > > Issues hit > > * boot: > - fi-kbl-soraka: [PASS][2] -> [FAIL][3] ([i915#3895]) >[2]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10464/fi-kbl-soraka/boot.html >[3]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20792/fi-kbl-soraka > /boot.html > > > > ### IGT changes ### > > Issues hit > > * igt@prime_vgem@basic-userptr: > - fi-rkl-guc: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][4] ([i915#3301]) >[4]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20792/fi-rkl-guc/ig > t@prime_v...@basic-userptr.html > > * igt@prime_vgem@basic-write: > - fi-rkl-guc: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][5] ([i915#3291]) +2 similar issues >[5]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20792/fi-rkl-guc/ig > t@prime_v...@basic-write.html > > > Possible fixes > > * igt@i915_pm_rps@basic-api: > - fi-rkl-guc: [DMESG-WARN][6] ([i915#3925]) -> [PASS][7] >[6]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10464/fi-rkl-guc/igt@i915_pm_...@basic-api.html >[7]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20792/fi-rkl-guc/ig > t@i915_pm_...@basic-api.html > > > Warnings > > * igt@runner@aborted: > - fi-rkl-guc: [FAIL][8] ([i915#3925]) -> [FAIL][9] ([i915#1602]) >[8]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10464/fi-rkl-guc/igt@run...@aborted.html >[9]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20792/fi-rkl-guc/ig > t@run...@aborted.html > > > [i915#1602]: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/1602 > [i915#3291]: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/3291 > [i915#3301]: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/3301 > [i915#3895]: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/3895 > [i915#3925]: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/3925 > > > Participating hosts (37 -> 34) > -- > > Missing(3): fi-bdw-samus fi-bsw-cyan bat-jsl-1 > > > Build changes > - > > * Linux: CI_DRM_10464 -> Patchwork_20792 > > CI-20190529: 20190529 > CI_DRM_10464: 294a55f328023a4e36f46e5eb6c4859076efd850 @ > git://anongit.freedesktop.org/gfx-ci/linux > IGT_6165: df5d05d742275b049f6f3c852a86c4769966b126 @ > https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/igt-gpu-tools.git > Patchwork_20792: 0af364b9489343e7bf0eb498f34d70f67dd7551c @ > git://anongit.freedesktop.org/gfx-ci/linux > > > == Linux commits == > > 0af364b94893 drm/i915: Tweaked Wa_14010685332 for all PCHs > > == Logs == > > For more details see: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20792/index.html
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for Tweaked Wa_14010685332 for all PCHs
Re-reported. -Original Message- From: Gupta, Anshuman Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2021 8:23 AM To: Vudum, Lakshminarayana Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for Tweaked Wa_14010685332 for all PCHs On 2021-08-10 at 13:57:29 +, Patchwork wrote: > == Series Details == > > Series: Tweaked Wa_14010685332 for all PCHs > URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/93548/ > State : failure > > == Summary == > > CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_10464 -> Patchwork_20792 > > > Summary > --- > > **FAILURE** > > Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_20792 absolutely need to be > verified manually. > > If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes > introduced in Patchwork_20792, please notify your bug team to allow them > to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI. > > External URL: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20792/index.html > > Possible new issues > --- > > Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in > Patchwork_20792: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Possible regressions > > * igt@core_hotunplug@unbind-rebind: > - fi-rkl-guc: NOTRUN -> [DMESG-WARN][1] >[1]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20792/fi-rkl-guc/ig > t@core_hotunp...@unbind-rebind.html Hi Lakshmi , Above CI BAT failure is a unrealted failure(not realted to display), it seems related to core power. could you plese create the issue and re-report the result. Thanks, Anshuman Gupta. > > > Known issues > > > Here are the changes found in Patchwork_20792 that come from known issues: > > ### CI changes ### > > Issues hit > > * boot: > - fi-kbl-soraka: [PASS][2] -> [FAIL][3] ([i915#3895]) >[2]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10464/fi-kbl-soraka/boot.html >[3]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20792/fi-kbl-soraka > /boot.html > > > > ### IGT changes ### > > Issues hit > > * igt@prime_vgem@basic-userptr: > - fi-rkl-guc: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][4] ([i915#3301]) >[4]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20792/fi-rkl-guc/ig > t@prime_v...@basic-userptr.html > > * igt@prime_vgem@basic-write: > - fi-rkl-guc: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][5] ([i915#3291]) +2 similar issues >[5]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20792/fi-rkl-guc/ig > t@prime_v...@basic-write.html > > > Possible fixes > > * igt@i915_pm_rps@basic-api: > - fi-rkl-guc: [DMESG-WARN][6] ([i915#3925]) -> [PASS][7] >[6]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10464/fi-rkl-guc/igt@i915_pm_...@basic-api.html >[7]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20792/fi-rkl-guc/ig > t@i915_pm_...@basic-api.html > > > Warnings > > * igt@runner@aborted: > - fi-rkl-guc: [FAIL][8] ([i915#3925]) -> [FAIL][9] ([i915#1602]) >[8]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10464/fi-rkl-guc/igt@run...@aborted.html >[9]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20792/fi-rkl-guc/ig > t@run...@aborted.html > > > [i915#1602]: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/1602 > [i915#3291]: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/3291 > [i915#3301]: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/3301 > [i915#3895]: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/3895 > [i915#3925]: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/3925 > > > Participating hosts (37 -> 34) > -- > > Missing(3): fi-bdw-samus fi-bsw-cyan bat-jsl-1 > > > Build changes > - > > * Linux: CI_DRM_10464 -> Patchwork_20792 > > CI-20190529: 20190529 > CI_DRM_10464: 294a55f328023a4e36f46e5eb6c4859076efd850 @ > git://anongit.freedesktop.org/gfx-ci/linux > IGT_6165: df5d05d742275b049f6f3c852a86c4769966b126 @ > https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/igt-gpu-tools.git > Patchwork_20792: 0af364b9489343e7bf0eb498f34d70f67dd7551c @ > git://anongit.freedesktop.org/gfx-ci/linux > > > == Linux commits == > > 0af364b94893 drm/i915: Tweaked Wa_14010685332 for all PCHs > > == Logs == > > For more details see: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20792/index.html
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for series starting with [v2,1/2] drm/i915: Don't include intel_de.h from intel_display_types.h (rev2)
Re-reported. -Original Message- From: Ville Syrjälä Sent: Tuesday, May 4, 2021 1:16 AM To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org Cc: Vudum, Lakshminarayana Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for series starting with [v2,1/2] drm/i915: Don't include intel_de.h from intel_display_types.h (rev2) On Mon, May 03, 2021 at 07:54:55PM -, Patchwork wrote: > == Series Details == > > Series: series starting with [v2,1/2] drm/i915: Don't include intel_de.h from > intel_display_types.h (rev2) > URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/89698/ > State : failure > > == Summary == > > CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_10039 -> Patchwork_20053 > > > Summary > --- > > **FAILURE** > > Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_20053 absolutely need to be > verified manually. > > If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes > introduced in Patchwork_20053, please notify your bug team to allow them > to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI. > > External URL: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20053/index.html > > Possible new issues > --- > > Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in > Patchwork_20053: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Possible regressions > > * igt@i915_selftest@live@blt: > - fi-bdw-5557u: [PASS][1] -> [INCOMPLETE][2] >[1]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10039/fi-bdw-5557u/igt@i915_selftest@l...@blt.html >[2]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20053/fi-bdw-5557u/ > igt@i915_selftest@l...@blt.html <4> [276.958769] WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 358 at kernel/workqueue.c:1418 __queue_work+0x2d2/0x620 ... <4> [276.959009] queue_work_on+0x68/0x80 <4> [276.959016] node_free+0x43/0x60 [i915] <4> [276.959140] pool_free_older_than+0x132/0x170 [i915] <4> [276.959270] pool_free_work+0x12/0x40 [i915] <4> [276.959395] process_one_work+0x270/0x5c0 <4> [276.959407] worker_thread+0x37/0x380 Which is /* if draining, only works from the same workqueue are allowed */ if (unlikely(wq->flags & __WQ_DRAINING) && WARN_ON_ONCE(!is_chained_work(wq))) return; Based on a cursory glance the queue_work is probably coming from i915_gem_free_object() -> queue_work(i915->wq, &i915->mm.free_work); So looks like i915_gem_drain_workqueue() is broken. Entirely unrelated to this patch series. -- Ville Syrjälä Intel ___ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/adl_p: Add support for Display Page Tables (rev2)
Re-reported.
-Original Message-
From: Deak, Imre
Sent: Thursday, May 6, 2021 10:58 AM
To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Vudum, Lakshminarayana
Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/adl_p: Add support for Display
Page Tables (rev2)
On Thu, May 06, 2021 at 05:03:29PM +, Patchwork wrote:
> == Series Details ==
>
> Series: drm/i915/adl_p: Add support for Display Page Tables (rev2)
> URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/89078/
> State : failure
>
> == Summary ==
>
> CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_10053 -> Patchwork_20077
>
>
> Summary
> ---
>
> **FAILURE**
>
> Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_20077 absolutely need to be
> verified manually.
>
> If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
> introduced in Patchwork_20077, please notify your bug team to allow them
> to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI.
>
> External URL:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20077/index.html
>
> Possible new issues
> ---
>
> Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in
> Patchwork_20077:
>
> ### IGT changes ###
>
> Possible regressions
>
> * igt@kms_chamelium@common-hpd-after-suspend:
> - fi-kbl-7500u: [PASS][1] -> [FAIL][2]
>[1]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10053/fi-kbl-7500u/igt@kms_chamel...@common-hpd-after-suspend.html
>[2]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20077/fi-kbl-7500u/
> igt@kms_chamel...@common-hpd-after-suspend.html
Chamelium doesn't disconnect after deasserting manually its HPD signal as
expected. No idea how it would be related to the ADL_P specific changes in this
patchset. I found a few previous instances of the same problem on the same
machine:
https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10045/fi-kbl-7500u/igt@kms_chamel...@common-hpd-after-suspend.html
https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20026/fi-kbl-7500u/igt@kms_chamel...@common-hpd-after-suspend.html
https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20021/fi-kbl-7500u/igt@kms_chamel...@common-hpd-after-suspend.html
https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/IGTPW_5766/fi-kbl-7500u/igt@kms_chamel...@common-hpd-after-suspend.html
https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Trybot_7697/fi-kbl-7500u/igt@kms_chamel...@common-hpd-after-suspend.html
Lakshmi, could we open a ticket for this?
> Known issues
>
>
> Here are the changes found in Patchwork_20077 that come from known issues:
>
> ### IGT changes ###
>
> Issues hit
>
> * igt@amdgpu/amd_prime@amd-to-i915:
> - fi-tgl-y: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][3] ([fdo#109315] / [i915#2575])
>[3]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20077/fi-tgl-y/igt@
> amdgpu/amd_pr...@amd-to-i915.html
>
> * igt@i915_selftest@live@hangcheck:
> - fi-snb-2600:[PASS][4] -> [INCOMPLETE][5] ([i915#2782])
>[4]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10053/fi-snb-2600/igt@i915_selftest@l...@hangcheck.html
>[5]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20077/fi-snb-2600/i
> gt@i915_selftest@l...@hangcheck.html
>
>
> {name}: This element is suppressed. This means it is ignored when computing
> the status of the difference (SUCCESS, WARNING, or FAILURE).
>
> [fdo#109315]: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109315
> [i915#1849]: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/1849
> [i915#2575]: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/2575
> [i915#2782]: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/2782
> [i915#3180]: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/3180
> [i915#3277]: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/3277
> [i915#3283]: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/3283
>
>
> Participating hosts (44 -> 40)
> --
>
> Missing(4): fi-ctg-p8600 fi-ilk-m540 fi-bdw-samus fi-hsw-4200u
>
>
> Build changes
> -
>
> * Linux: CI_DRM_10053 -> Patchwork_20077
>
> CI-20190529: 20190529
> CI_DRM_10053: 3e000bbf311ad04f734843e1ba6396b28ba44399 @
> git://anongit.freedesktop.org/gfx-ci/linux
> IGT_6080: 1c450c3d4df19cf1087b8ccff3b62cb51addacae @
> git://anongit.freedesktop.org/xorg/app/intel-gpu-tools
> Patchwork_20077: e83dba92cd47bd2b5841fc8e7f66bbd7d376e7bd @
> git://anongit.freedesktop.org/gfx-ci/linux
>
>
> == Linux commits ==
>
> e83dba92cd47 drm/i915/adl_p: Enable remapping to pad DPT FB strides to
> POT 6cc7df9cf93e drm
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915: Use correct downstream caps for check Src-Ctl mode for PCON (rev2)
Re-reported.
From: Nautiyal, Ankit K
Sent: Thursday, May 6, 2021 9:28 PM
To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Vudum, Lakshminarayana
Subject: RE: ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915: Use correct downstream caps for
check Src-Ctl mode for PCON (rev2)
Hi Lakshmi,
The following failure is due to existing issue :
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/541
Possible regressions
* igt@i915_selftest@live@gt_heartbeat:
* fi-tgl-y:
PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10047/fi-tgl-y/igt@i915_selftest@live@gt_heartbeat.html>
->
DMESG-FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20065/fi-tgl-y/igt@i915_selftest@live@gt_heartbeat.html>
Thanks & Regards,
Ankit
From: Patchwork
Sent: Wednesday, May 5, 2021 2:32 PM
To: Nautiyal, Ankit K
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915: Use correct downstream caps for
check Src-Ctl mode for PCON (rev2)
Patch Details
Series:
drm/i915: Use correct downstream caps for check Src-Ctl mode for PCON (rev2)
URL:
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/89639/
State:
failure
Details:
https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20065/index.html
CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_10047 -> Patchwork_20065
Summary
FAILURE
Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_20065 absolutely need to be
verified manually.
If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
introduced in Patchwork_20065, please notify your bug team to allow them
to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI.
External URL:
https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20065/index.html
Possible new issues
Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in Patchwork_20065:
IGT changes
Possible regressions
* igt@i915_selftest@live@gt_heartbeat:
* fi-tgl-y:
PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10047/fi-tgl-y/igt@i915_selftest@live@gt_heartbeat.html>
->
DMESG-FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20065/fi-tgl-y/igt@i915_selftest@live@gt_heartbeat.html>
Known issues
Here are the changes found in Patchwork_20065 that come from known issues:
IGT changes
Issues hit
* igt@amdgpu/amd_basic@semaphore:
* fi-bsw-nick: NOTRUN ->
SKIP<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20065/fi-bsw-nick/igt@amdgpu/amd_ba...@semaphore.html>
(fdo#109271<https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109271>) +17 similar
issues
* igt@amdgpu/amd_cs_nop@fork-gfx0:
* fi-tgl-y: NOTRUN ->
SKIP<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20065/fi-tgl-y/igt@amdgpu/amd_cs_...@fork-gfx0.html>
(fdo#109315<https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109315> /
i915#2575<https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/2575>) +13 similar
issues
* igt@gem_exec_gttfill@basic:
* fi-bsw-n3050: NOTRUN ->
SKIP<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20065/fi-bsw-n3050/igt@gem_exec_gttf...@basic.html>
(fdo#109271<https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109271>)
* igt@gem_exec_suspend@basic-s3:
* fi-bsw-n3050: NOTRUN ->
INCOMPLETE<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20065/fi-bsw-n3050/igt@gem_exec_susp...@basic-s3.html>
(i915#3159<https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/3159>)
Possible fixes
* igt@i915_pm_rpm@basic-rte:
* {fi-tgl-1115g4}:
DMESG-WARN<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10047/fi-tgl-1115g4/igt@i915_pm_...@basic-rte.html>
(i915#402<https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/402>) ->
PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20065/fi-tgl-1115g4/igt@i915_pm_...@basic-rte.html>
* igt@i915_pm_rpm@module-reload:
* {fi-tgl-1115g4}:
DMESG-WARN<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10047/fi-tgl-1115g4/igt@i915_pm_...@module-reload.html>
(k.org#205379<https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=205379>) ->
PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20065/fi-tgl-1115g4/igt@i915_pm_...@module-reload.html>
* igt@i915_selftest@live@late_gt_pm:
* fi-bsw-nick:
DMESG-FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10047/fi-bsw-nick/igt@i915_selftest@live@late_gt_pm.html>
(i915#2927<https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/2927>) ->
PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20065/fi-bsw-nick/igt@i915_selftest@live@late_gt_pm.html>
{name}: This element is suppressed. This means it is ignored when computing
the status of the difference (SUCCESS, WARNING, or FAILURE).
Participating hosts (43 -> 40)
Additional (1): fi-bsw-n3050
Missing (4): fi-ctg-p8600 fi-ilk-m540 fi-bdw-samus fi-hsw-4200u
Build changes
* Linux: CI_DRM_10047 -> Patchwork_20065
CI-20190529: 20190529
CI_DRM_10047: 6bc6aeb4870cfb28f24523f42157cf9a86be80d
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915/adl_p: Add support for Display Page Tables (rev2)
spec@ext_transform_feedback@builtin-varyings gl_clipvertex (NEW): This test is not available in CI bug log. So, I cannot re-report. Lakshmi. -Original Message- From: Deak, Imre Sent: Friday, May 7, 2021 2:36 AM To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Roper, Matthew D ; Taylor, Clinton A ; Ville Syrjälä ; Heikkila, Juha-pekka ; Souza, Jose ; Chris Wilson ; De Marchi, Lucas ; Vudum, Lakshminarayana ; Nikula, Jani ; Vivi, Rodrigo Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915/adl_p: Add support for Display Page Tables (rev2) On Thu, May 06, 2021 at 08:17:37PM +, Patchwork wrote: > == Series Details == > > Series: drm/i915/adl_p: Add support for Display Page Tables (rev2) > URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/89078/ > State : failure Merged to -din, thanks for the patches and reviews. The failure is unrelated see below. > == Summary == > > CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_10053_full -> Patchwork_20077_full > > > Summary > --- > > **FAILURE** > > Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_20077_full absolutely need to > be > verified manually. > > If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes > introduced in Patchwork_20077_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_20077_full: > > ### Piglit changes ### > > Possible regressions > > * spec@ext_transform_feedback@builtin-varyings gl_clipvertex (NEW): > - pig-glk-j5005: NOTRUN -> [INCOMPLETE][1] I didn't find a way to match dmesg to the test, but looks like: <3>[ 290.820108] intel_rps_park:864 GEM_BUG_ON(atomic_read(&rps->num_waiters)) Previous instances of the above issue on the same machine during Piglit runs: CI_DIN_195/pig-glk-j5005 CI_DRM_10019/pig-glk-j5005 Patchwork_20044/pig-glk-j5005 on SKL-6260u: Patchwork_20068/pig-skl-6260u during IGT runs on GLK: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/IGTPW_5785/shard-glk4/igt@gem_exec_fl...@basic-uc-rw-default.html https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20032/shard-glk1/igt@gem_exec_fl...@basic-wb-ro-before-default.html CI_DIN_193/shard-glk8 Trybot_7699/shard-glk3 on other platforms: kasan_247/fi-bsw-kefka kasan_250/fi-kbl-r kasan_250/fi-jsl-1 kasan_251/fi-bsw-kefka kasan_252/fi-bsw-kefka The changes in the patchset are not relevant on GLK. >[1]: None > > > New tests > - > > New tests have been introduced between CI_DRM_10053_full and > Patchwork_20077_full: > > ### New Piglit tests (1) ### > > * spec@ext_transform_feedback@builtin-varyings gl_clipvertex: > - Statuses : 1 incomplete(s) > - Exec time: [0.0] s > > > > Known issues > > > Here are the changes found in Patchwork_20077_full that come from known > issues: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Issues hit > > * igt@feature_discovery@display-2x: > - shard-iclb: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][2] ([i915#1839]) >[2]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20077/shard-iclb2/i > gt@feature_discov...@display-2x.html > > * igt@gem_ctx_persistence@clone: > - shard-snb: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][3] ([fdo#109271] / [i915#1099]) +5 > similar issues >[3]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20077/shard-snb6/ig > t@gem_ctx_persiste...@clone.html > > * igt@gem_eio@unwedge-stress: > - shard-snb: NOTRUN -> [FAIL][4] ([i915#3354]) >[4]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20077/shard-snb6/ig > t@gem_...@unwedge-stress.html > > * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace-share@rcs0: > - shard-tglb: [PASS][5] -> [FAIL][6] ([i915#2842]) >[5]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10053/shard-tglb3/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace-sh...@rcs0.html >[6]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20077/shard-tglb5/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace-sh...@rcs0.html > - shard-glk: [PASS][7] -> [FAIL][8] ([i915#2842]) +1 similar > issue >[7]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10053/shard-glk2/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace-sh...@rcs0.html >[8]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20077/shard-glk5/ig > t@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace-sh...@rcs0.html > > * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace-solo@rcs0: > - shard-iclb: [PASS][9] -> [FAIL][10] ([i915#2842]) >[9]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_1
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for CI pass for reviewed XeLPD / ADL-P patches (rev2)
Matt, Gitlab is down at the moment. We have a similar bug but I need to still
confirm the same. Once the gitlab is up and running I will check and if
required I will a new issue and re-report the results.
I will re-visit gitlab issues later today.
Lakshmi.
-Original Message-
From: Roper, Matthew D
Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2021 9:18 AM
To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: Vudum, Lakshminarayana
Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for CI pass for reviewed XeLPD / ADL-P
patches (rev2)
On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 06:13:10AM +, Patchwork wrote:
> == Series Details ==
>
> Series: CI pass for reviewed XeLPD / ADL-P patches (rev2)
> URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/90048/
> State : failure
>
> == Summary ==
>
> CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_10071 -> Patchwork_20107
>
>
> Summary
> ---
>
> **FAILURE**
>
> Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_20107 absolutely need to be
> verified manually.
>
> If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
> introduced in Patchwork_20107, please notify your bug team to allow them
> to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI.
>
> External URL:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20107/index.html
>
> Possible new issues
> ---
>
> Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in
> Patchwork_20107:
>
> ### IGT changes ###
>
> Possible regressions
>
> * igt@kms_pipe_crc_basic@nonblocking-crc-pipe-a:
> - fi-elk-e7500: [PASS][1] -> [FAIL][2]
>[1]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10071/fi-elk-e7500/igt@kms_pipe_crc_ba...@nonblocking-crc-pipe-a.html
>[2]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20107/fi-elk-e7500/
> igt@kms_pipe_crc_ba...@nonblocking-crc-pipe-a.html
>
> * igt@kms_pipe_crc_basic@read-crc-pipe-a:
> - fi-bwr-2160:[PASS][3] -> [FAIL][4] +1 similar issue
>[3]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10071/fi-bwr-2160/igt@kms_pipe_crc_ba...@read-crc-pipe-a.html
>[4]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20107/fi-bwr-2160/i
> gt@kms_pipe_crc_ba...@read-crc-pipe-a.html
These two reports for old (gen4) platforms aren't related to this series.
According to
https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/index.html?testfilter=pipe_crc_basic
there has been relatively frequent failures for kms_pipe_crc_basic subtests
since CI_DRM_10065.
@Lakshmi, do we already have a bug report these should be associated with?
Matt
>
>
> Suppressed
>
> The following results come from untrusted machines, tests, or statuses.
> They do not affect the overall result.
>
> * igt@i915_selftest@live@execlists:
> - {fi-rkl-11500t}:NOTRUN -> [DMESG-FAIL][5]
>[5]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20107/fi-rkl-11500t
> /igt@i915_selftest@l...@execlists.html
>
>
> Known issues
>
>
> Here are the changes found in Patchwork_20107 that come from known issues:
>
> ### IGT changes ###
>
> Issues hit
>
> * igt@gem_exec_fence@basic-await@vecs0:
> - fi-glk-dsi: [PASS][6] -> [FAIL][7] ([i915#3457])
>[6]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10071/fi-glk-dsi/igt@gem_exec_fence@basic-aw...@vecs0.html
>[7]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20107/fi-glk-dsi/ig
> t@gem_exec_fence@basic-aw...@vecs0.html
>
> * igt@gem_exec_fence@nb-await@vcs0:
> - fi-bsw-kefka: [PASS][8] -> [FAIL][9] ([i915#3457]) +1 similar
> issue
>[8]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10071/fi-bsw-kefka/igt@gem_exec_fence@nb-aw...@vcs0.html
>[9]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20107/fi-bsw-kefka/
> igt@gem_exec_fence@nb-aw...@vcs0.html
>
> * igt@gem_exec_fence@nb-await@vecs0:
> - fi-bsw-n3050: [PASS][10] -> [FAIL][11] ([i915#3457]) +1 similar
> issue
>[10]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10071/fi-bsw-n3050/igt@gem_exec_fence@nb-aw...@vecs0.html
>[11]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20107/fi-bsw-n3050/
> igt@gem_exec_fence@nb-aw...@vecs0.html
>
> * igt@gem_wait@wait@all:
> - fi-bwr-2160:[PASS][12] -> [FAIL][13] ([i915#3457])
>[12]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10071/fi-bwr-2160/igt@gem_wait@w...@all.html
>[13]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20107/fi-bwr-2160/igt@gem_wait@w...@all.html
> - fi-bsw-nick:[PASS][14] -> [FA
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for CI pass for reviewed XeLPD / ADL-P patches (rev2)
Re-reported.
-Original Message-
From: Roper, Matthew D
Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2021 9:18 AM
To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: Vudum, Lakshminarayana
Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for CI pass for reviewed XeLPD / ADL-P
patches (rev2)
On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 06:13:10AM +, Patchwork wrote:
> == Series Details ==
>
> Series: CI pass for reviewed XeLPD / ADL-P patches (rev2)
> URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/90048/
> State : failure
>
> == Summary ==
>
> CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_10071 -> Patchwork_20107
>
>
> Summary
> ---
>
> **FAILURE**
>
> Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_20107 absolutely need to be
> verified manually.
>
> If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
> introduced in Patchwork_20107, please notify your bug team to allow them
> to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI.
>
> External URL:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20107/index.html
>
> Possible new issues
> ---
>
> Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in
> Patchwork_20107:
>
> ### IGT changes ###
>
> Possible regressions
>
> * igt@kms_pipe_crc_basic@nonblocking-crc-pipe-a:
> - fi-elk-e7500: [PASS][1] -> [FAIL][2]
>[1]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10071/fi-elk-e7500/igt@kms_pipe_crc_ba...@nonblocking-crc-pipe-a.html
>[2]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20107/fi-elk-e7500/
> igt@kms_pipe_crc_ba...@nonblocking-crc-pipe-a.html
>
> * igt@kms_pipe_crc_basic@read-crc-pipe-a:
> - fi-bwr-2160:[PASS][3] -> [FAIL][4] +1 similar issue
>[3]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10071/fi-bwr-2160/igt@kms_pipe_crc_ba...@read-crc-pipe-a.html
>[4]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20107/fi-bwr-2160/i
> gt@kms_pipe_crc_ba...@read-crc-pipe-a.html
These two reports for old (gen4) platforms aren't related to this series.
According to
https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/index.html?testfilter=pipe_crc_basic
there has been relatively frequent failures for kms_pipe_crc_basic subtests
since CI_DRM_10065.
@Lakshmi, do we already have a bug report these should be associated with?
Matt
>
>
> Suppressed
>
> The following results come from untrusted machines, tests, or statuses.
> They do not affect the overall result.
>
> * igt@i915_selftest@live@execlists:
> - {fi-rkl-11500t}:NOTRUN -> [DMESG-FAIL][5]
>[5]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20107/fi-rkl-11500t
> /igt@i915_selftest@l...@execlists.html
>
>
> Known issues
>
>
> Here are the changes found in Patchwork_20107 that come from known issues:
>
> ### IGT changes ###
>
> Issues hit
>
> * igt@gem_exec_fence@basic-await@vecs0:
> - fi-glk-dsi: [PASS][6] -> [FAIL][7] ([i915#3457])
>[6]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10071/fi-glk-dsi/igt@gem_exec_fence@basic-aw...@vecs0.html
>[7]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20107/fi-glk-dsi/ig
> t@gem_exec_fence@basic-aw...@vecs0.html
>
> * igt@gem_exec_fence@nb-await@vcs0:
> - fi-bsw-kefka: [PASS][8] -> [FAIL][9] ([i915#3457]) +1 similar
> issue
>[8]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10071/fi-bsw-kefka/igt@gem_exec_fence@nb-aw...@vcs0.html
>[9]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20107/fi-bsw-kefka/
> igt@gem_exec_fence@nb-aw...@vcs0.html
>
> * igt@gem_exec_fence@nb-await@vecs0:
> - fi-bsw-n3050: [PASS][10] -> [FAIL][11] ([i915#3457]) +1 similar
> issue
>[10]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10071/fi-bsw-n3050/igt@gem_exec_fence@nb-aw...@vecs0.html
>[11]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20107/fi-bsw-n3050/
> igt@gem_exec_fence@nb-aw...@vecs0.html
>
> * igt@gem_wait@wait@all:
> - fi-bwr-2160:[PASS][12] -> [FAIL][13] ([i915#3457])
>[12]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10071/fi-bwr-2160/igt@gem_wait@w...@all.html
>[13]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20107/fi-bwr-2160/igt@gem_wait@w...@all.html
> - fi-bsw-nick:[PASS][14] -> [FAIL][15] ([i915#3457]) +1 similar
> issue
>[14]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10071/fi-bsw-nick/igt@gem_wait@w...@all.html
>[15]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20107/fi-bsw-n
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915: Reenable LTTPR non-transparent LT mode for DPCD_REV<1.4
Re-reported.
-Original Message-
From: Deak, Imre
Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2021 3:46 PM
To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Vudum, Lakshminarayana
Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915: Reenable LTTPR non-transparent
LT mode for DPCD_REV<1.4
Hi Lakshmi,
On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 10:23:59PM +, Patchwork wrote:
> == Series Details ==
>
> Series: drm/i915: Reenable LTTPR non-transparent LT mode for DPCD_REV<1.4
> URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/90102/
> State : failure
>
> == Summary ==
>
> CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_10074 -> Patchwork_20115
>
>
> Summary
> ---
>
> **FAILURE**
>
> Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_20115 absolutely need to be
> verified manually.
>
> If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
> introduced in Patchwork_20115, please notify your bug team to allow them
> to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI.
>
> External URL:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20115/index.html
>
> Possible new issues
> ---
>
> Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in
> Patchwork_20115:
>
> ### IGT changes ###
>
> Possible regressions
>
> * igt@runner@aborted:
> - fi-ilk-650: NOTRUN -> [FAIL][1]
>[1]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20115/fi-ilk-650/ig
> t@run...@aborted.html
x86/PAT: kms_busy:4365 map pfn RAM range req write-combining for [mem
0x109055000-0x109055fff], got write-back ...
i915 :00:02.0: [drm] kms_busy[4365] context reset due to GPU hang
Looks like the same issue as
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/3457
>
>
> Warnings
>
> * igt@i915_selftest@live@execlists:
> - fi-bsw-nick:[INCOMPLETE][2] ([i915#2782] / [i915#2940]) ->
> [DMESG-FAIL][3]
>[2]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10074/fi-bsw-nick/igt@i915_selftest@l...@execlists.html
>[3]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20115/fi-bsw-nick/i
> gt@i915_selftest@l...@execlists.html
>
>
> Suppressed
>
> The following results come from untrusted machines, tests, or statuses.
> They do not affect the overall result.
>
> * igt@runner@aborted:
> - {fi-rkl-11500t}:NOTRUN -> [FAIL][4]
>[4]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20115/fi-rkl-11500t
> /igt@run...@aborted.html
>
>
> Known issues
>
>
> Here are the changes found in Patchwork_20115 that come from known issues:
>
> ### IGT changes ###
>
> Issues hit
>
> * igt@gem_exec_fence@basic-await@vcs0:
> - fi-bsw-n3050: [PASS][5] -> [FAIL][6] ([i915#3457])
>[5]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10074/fi-bsw-n3050/igt@gem_exec_fence@basic-aw...@vcs0.html
>[6]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20115/fi-bsw-n3050/
> igt@gem_exec_fence@basic-aw...@vcs0.html
>
> * igt@gem_exec_fence@basic-await@vecs0:
> - fi-glk-dsi: [PASS][7] -> [FAIL][8] ([i915#3457])
>[7]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10074/fi-glk-dsi/igt@gem_exec_fence@basic-aw...@vecs0.html
>[8]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20115/fi-glk-dsi/ig
> t@gem_exec_fence@basic-aw...@vecs0.html
>
> * igt@gem_exec_fence@basic-busy@bcs0:
> - fi-kbl-soraka: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][9] ([fdo#109271]) +6 similar issues
>[9]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20115/fi-kbl-soraka
> /igt@gem_exec_fence@basic-b...@bcs0.html
>
> * igt@gem_exec_fence@nb-await@vcs0:
> - fi-bsw-kefka: [PASS][10] -> [FAIL][11] ([i915#3457]) +2 similar
> issues
>[10]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10074/fi-bsw-kefka/igt@gem_exec_fence@nb-aw...@vcs0.html
>[11]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20115/fi-bsw-kefka/
> igt@gem_exec_fence@nb-aw...@vcs0.html
>
> * igt@gem_exec_suspend@basic-s3:
> - fi-tgl-u2: [PASS][12] -> [FAIL][13] ([i915#1888])
>[12]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10074/fi-tgl-u2/igt@gem_exec_susp...@basic-s3.html
>[13]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20115/fi-tgl-u2/igt
> @gem_exec_susp...@basic-s3.html
>
> * igt@gem_huc_copy@huc-copy:
> - fi-kbl-soraka: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][14] ([fdo#109271] / [i915#2190])
>[14]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20115/fi-kbl-soraka
> /igt@gem_huc_c.
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915: Reenable LTTPR non-transparent LT mode for DPCD_REV<1.4
Re-reported.
-Original Message-
From: Deak, Imre
Sent: Friday, May 21, 2021 7:33 AM
To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Casey Harkins ;
Almahallawy, Khaled ; Vudum, Lakshminarayana
Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915: Reenable LTTPR non-transparent
LT mode for DPCD_REV<1.4
On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 11:23:41PM +, Patchwork wrote:
> == Series Details ==
>
> Series: drm/i915: Reenable LTTPR non-transparent LT mode for DPCD_REV<1.4
> URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/90102/
> State : failure
Pushed to drm-intel-next, thanks for the report, testing and review.
The failures are unrelated see below.
> == Summary ==
>
> CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_10074_full -> Patchwork_20115_full
>
>
> Summary
> ---
>
> **FAILURE**
>
> Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_20115_full absolutely need to
> be
> verified manually.
>
> If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
> introduced in Patchwork_20115_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_20115_full:
>
> ### IGT changes ###
>
> Possible regressions
>
> * igt@kms_draw_crc@draw-method-xrgb-blt-untiled:
> - shard-skl: NOTRUN -> [FAIL][1]
>[1]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20115/shard-skl8/ig
> t@kms_draw_...@draw-method-xrgb-blt-untiled.html
>
> * igt@kms_flip_tiling@flip-changes-tiling@hdmi-a-1-pipe-c:
> - shard-glk: [PASS][2] -> [FAIL][3] +1 similar issue
>[2]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10074/shard-glk8/igt@kms_flip_tiling@flip-changes-til...@hdmi-a-1-pipe-c.html
>[3]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20115/shard-glk6/ig
> t@kms_flip_tiling@flip-changes-til...@hdmi-a-1-pipe-c.html
>
> * igt@kms_plane_cursor@pipe-b-primary-size-256:
> - shard-snb: NOTRUN -> [FAIL][4]
>[4]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20115/shard-snb5/ig
> t@kms_plane_cur...@pipe-b-primary-size-256.html
On all the above platforms the LTTPR detection is disabled, so the change is
unrelevant on them.
All the logs have the
x86/PAT: gem_mmap_offset:1163 map pfn RAM range req write-combining for [mem
0x11d278000-0x11d278fff], got write-back message, so the failures could be
related to that.
> Suppressed
>
> The following results come from untrusted machines, tests, or statuses.
> They do not affect the overall result.
>
> * {igt@kms_plane@plane-position-hole@pipe-a-planes}:
> - shard-glk: [FAIL][5] ([i915#3457]) -> [FAIL][6]
>[5]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10074/shard-glk9/igt@kms_plane@plane-position-h...@pipe-a-planes.html
>[6]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20115/shard-glk8/ig
> t@kms_plane@plane-position-h...@pipe-a-planes.html
>
>
>
> ### Piglit changes ###
>
> Possible regressions
>
> *
> spec@arb_gpu_shader_int64@execution@built-in-functions@fs-op-ne-uint64_t-uint64_t
> (NEW):
> - {pig-icl-1065g7}: NOTRUN -> [CRASH][7]
>[7]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20115/pig-icl-1065g
> 7/spec@arb_gpu_shader_int64@execution@built-in-functions@fs-op-ne-uint
> 64_t-uint64_t.html
>
> *
> spec@arb_gpu_shader_int64@execution@built-in-functions@tcs-op-gt-uint64_t-uint64_t-using-if
> (NEW):
> - {pig-icl-1065g7}: NOTRUN -> [INCOMPLETE][8] +7 similar issues
>[8]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20115/pig-icl-1065g
> 7/spec@arb_gpu_shader_int64@execution@built-in-functions@tcs-op-gt-uin
> t64_t-uint64_t-using-if.html
>
>
> New tests
> -
>
> New tests have been introduced between CI_DRM_10074_full and
> Patchwork_20115_full:
>
> ### New Piglit tests (9) ###
>
> *
> spec@arb_gpu_shader_int64@execution@built-in-functions@cs-min-i64vec2-i64vec2:
> - Statuses : 1 incomplete(s)
> - Exec time: [0.0] s
>
> *
> spec@arb_gpu_shader_int64@execution@built-in-functions@cs-op-mult-i64vec3-i64vec3:
> - Statuses : 1 incomplete(s)
> - Exec time: [0.0] s
>
> *
> spec@arb_gpu_shader_int64@execution@built-in-functions@fs-op-ne-uint64_t-uint64_t:
> - Statuses : 1 crash(s)
> - Exec time: [0.76] s
>
> *
> spec@arb_gpu_shader_int64@execution@built-in-functions@gs-max-i64vec3
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for series starting with [1/3] drm/i915/ddi: Flush encoder power domain ref puts during driver unload
Re-reported. -Original Message- From: Deak, Imre Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2021 11:04 AM To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Vudum, Lakshminarayana Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for series starting with [1/3] drm/i915/ddi: Flush encoder power domain ref puts during driver unload On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 10:02:11AM +, Patchwork wrote: > == Series Details == > > Series: series starting with [1/3] drm/i915/ddi: Flush encoder power domain > ref puts during driver unload > URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/90613/ > State : failure > > == Summary == > > CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_10138_full -> Patchwork_20207_full > > > Summary > --- > > **FAILURE** > > Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_20207_full absolutely need to > be > verified manually. > > If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes > introduced in Patchwork_20207_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_20207_full: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Possible regressions > > * igt@gem_mmap_gtt@fault-concurrent-y: > - shard-skl: NOTRUN -> [INCOMPLETE][1] >[1]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20207/shard-skl5/ig > t@gem_mmap_...@fault-concurrent-y.html The test scenario/platform is not related to the changes in patches 1 and 2. I can't see how the change in patch 3 would introduce a hang; at most it would leave a display power well enabled triggering a power state check failure. Possibly related issues: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/3468 https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/3485 > Known issues > > > Here are the changes found in Patchwork_20207_full that come from known > issues: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Issues hit > > * igt@feature_discovery@display-3x: > - shard-tglb: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][2] ([i915#1839]) >[2]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20207/shard-tglb3/i > gt@feature_discov...@display-3x.html > > * igt@gem_ctx_persistence@legacy-engines-mixed: > - shard-snb: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][3] ([fdo#109271] / [i915#1099]) +6 > similar issues >[3]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20207/shard-snb2/ig > t@gem_ctx_persiste...@legacy-engines-mixed.html > > * igt@gem_eio@in-flight-contexts-1us: > - shard-tglb: [PASS][4] -> [TIMEOUT][5] ([i915#3063]) >[4]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10138/shard-tglb7/igt@gem_...@in-flight-contexts-1us.html >[5]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20207/shard-tglb5/i > gt@gem_...@in-flight-contexts-1us.html > > * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-deadline: > - shard-glk: [PASS][6] -> [FAIL][7] ([i915#2846]) >[6]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10138/shard-glk6/igt@gem_exec_f...@basic-deadline.html >[7]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20207/shard-glk9/igt@gem_exec_f...@basic-deadline.html > - shard-apl: NOTRUN -> [FAIL][8] ([i915#2846]) >[8]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20207/shard-apl7/ig > t@gem_exec_f...@basic-deadline.html > > * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace@rcs0: > - shard-kbl: [PASS][9] -> [FAIL][10] ([i915#2842]) +1 similar > issue >[9]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10138/shard-kbl4/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-p...@rcs0.html >[10]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20207/shard-kbl1/ig > t@gem_exec_fair@basic-p...@rcs0.html > > * igt@gem_exec_reloc@basic-wide-active@rcs0: > - shard-snb: NOTRUN -> [FAIL][11] ([i915#2389]) +2 similar issues >[11]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20207/shard-snb2/ig > t@gem_exec_reloc@basic-wide-act...@rcs0.html > > * igt@gem_exec_suspend@basic-s3: > - shard-kbl: NOTRUN -> [DMESG-WARN][12] ([i915#180]) >[12]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20207/shard-kbl1/ig > t@gem_exec_susp...@basic-s3.html > > * igt@gem_mmap_gtt@cpuset-basic-small-copy: > - shard-apl: [PASS][13] -> [INCOMPLETE][14] ([i915#3468]) >[13]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10138/shard-apl6/igt@gem_mmap_...@cpuset-basic-small-copy.html >[14]: > https
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915/adlp: Add missing TBT AUX -> PW#2 power domain dependencies
Re-reported. -Original Message- From: Deak, Imre Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2021 10:50 AM To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Vudum, Lakshminarayana ; Sarvela, Tomi P Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915/adlp: Add missing TBT AUX -> PW#2 power domain dependencies Hi Lakshmi, Tomi, On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 04:21:06PM +, Patchwork wrote: > == Series Details == > > Series: drm/i915/adlp: Add missing TBT AUX -> PW#2 power domain dependencies > URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/90631/ > State : failure > > == Summary == > > CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_10138_full -> Patchwork_20215_full > > > Summary > --- > > **FAILURE** > > Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_20215_full absolutely need to > be > verified manually. > > If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes > introduced in Patchwork_20215_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_20215_full: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Possible regressions > > * igt@drm_read@fault-buffer: > - shard-tglb: [PASS][1] -> [DMESG-WARN][2] +1 similar issue >[1]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10138/shard-tglb5/igt@drm_r...@fault-buffer.html >[2]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20215/shard-tglb5/i > gt@drm_r...@fault-buffer.html Unrelated platform. The same issue on shard-tglb5 was reported earlier, see https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/igt-dev/2021-May/031535.html Could the eDP cable/panel get checked/replaced on this machine? > * igt@i915_pm_sseu@full-enable: > - shard-skl: [PASS][3] -> [FAIL][4] >[3]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10138/shard-skl2/igt@i915_pm_s...@full-enable.html >[4]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20215/shard-skl2/ig > t@i915_pm_s...@full-enable.html Unrelated platform, a similar issue seen before: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/286 > Known issues > > > Here are the changes found in Patchwork_20215_full that come from known > issues: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Issues hit > > * igt@gem_ctx_persistence@legacy-engines-mixed: > - shard-snb: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][5] ([fdo#109271] / [i915#1099]) +2 > similar issues >[5]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20215/shard-snb2/ig > t@gem_ctx_persiste...@legacy-engines-mixed.html > > * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-deadline: > - shard-glk: [PASS][6] -> [FAIL][7] ([i915#2846]) >[6]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10138/shard-glk6/igt@gem_exec_f...@basic-deadline.html >[7]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20215/shard-glk8/igt@gem_exec_f...@basic-deadline.html > - shard-apl: NOTRUN -> [FAIL][8] ([i915#2846]) >[8]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20215/shard-apl8/ig > t@gem_exec_f...@basic-deadline.html > > * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-share@rcs0: > - shard-tglb: [PASS][9] -> [FAIL][10] ([i915#2842]) >[9]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10138/shard-tglb7/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-sh...@rcs0.html >[10]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20215/shard-tglb3/i > gt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-sh...@rcs0.html > > * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none@vcs1: > - shard-iclb: NOTRUN -> [FAIL][11] ([i915#2842]) >[11]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20215/shard-iclb1/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-n...@vcs1.html > - shard-kbl: [PASS][12] -> [FAIL][13] ([i915#2842]) >[12]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10138/shard-kbl3/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-n...@vcs1.html >[13]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20215/shard-kbl2/ig > t@gem_exec_fair@basic-n...@vcs1.html > > * igt@gem_exec_reloc@basic-wide-active@rcs0: > - shard-snb: NOTRUN -> [FAIL][14] ([i915#2389]) +2 similar issues >[14]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20215/shard-snb2/ig > t@gem_exec_reloc@basic-wide-act...@rcs0.html > > * igt@gem_exec_suspend@basic-s3: > - shard-kbl: NOTRUN -> [DMESG-WARN][15] ([i915#180]) >[15]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20215/shard-kbl2/ig >
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/adl_p: Also disable underrun recovery with MSO
Re-reported. -Original Message- From: Roper, Matthew D Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2021 9:26 AM To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org Cc: Vudum, Lakshminarayana Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/adl_p: Also disable underrun recovery with MSO On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 04:02:14PM +, Patchwork wrote: > == Series Details == > > Series: drm/i915/adl_p: Also disable underrun recovery with MSO > URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/93732/ > State : failure > > == Summary == > > CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_10490 -> Patchwork_20835 > > > Summary > --- > > **FAILURE** > > Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_20835 absolutely need to be > verified manually. > > If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes > introduced in Patchwork_20835, please notify your bug team to allow them > to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI. > > External URL: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20835/index.html > > Possible new issues > --- > > Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in > Patchwork_20835: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Possible regressions > > * igt@i915_selftest@live@hangcheck: > - fi-ivb-3770:[PASS][1] -> [INCOMPLETE][2] >[1]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10490/fi-ivb-3770/igt@i915_selftest@l...@hangcheck.html >[2]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20835/fi-ivb-3770/i > gt@i915_selftest@l...@hangcheck.html This IVB error is unrelated to the patch here (which would only affect platforms with display version >= 13). Matt > > > Known issues > > > Here are the changes found in Patchwork_20835 that come from known issues: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Issues hit > > * igt@amdgpu/amd_basic@semaphore: > - fi-bdw-5557u: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][3] ([fdo#109271]) +27 similar > issues >[3]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20835/fi-bdw-5557u/ > igt@amdgpu/amd_ba...@semaphore.html > > * igt@core_hotunplug@unbind-rebind: > - fi-bdw-5557u: NOTRUN -> [WARN][4] ([i915#3718]) >[4]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20835/fi-bdw-5557u/ > igt@core_hotunp...@unbind-rebind.html > > * igt@kms_chamelium@dp-crc-fast: > - fi-bdw-5557u: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][5] ([fdo#109271] / [fdo#111827]) > +8 similar issues >[5]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20835/fi-bdw-5557u/ > igt@kms_chamel...@dp-crc-fast.html > > * igt@runner@aborted: > - fi-ivb-3770:NOTRUN -> [FAIL][6] ([fdo#109271]) >[6]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20835/fi-ivb-3770/i > gt@run...@aborted.html > > > [fdo#109271]: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109271 > [fdo#111827]: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=111827 > [i915#3718]: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/3718 > > > Participating hosts (36 -> 34) > -- > > Missing(2): fi-bsw-cyan fi-bdw-samus > > > Build changes > - > > * Linux: CI_DRM_10490 -> Patchwork_20835 > > CI-20190529: 20190529 > CI_DRM_10490: 3bd74b377986fcb89cf4563629f97c5b3199ca6f @ > git://anongit.freedesktop.org/gfx-ci/linux > IGT_6177: f474644e7226dd319195ca03b3cde82ad10ac54c @ > https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/igt-gpu-tools.git > Patchwork_20835: 4a9bac99ddffb1e355f2084d1b46465aac20b6c8 @ > git://anongit.freedesktop.org/gfx-ci/linux > > > == Linux commits == > > 4a9bac99ddff drm/i915/adl_p: Also disable underrun recovery with MSO > > == Logs == > > For more details see: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20835/index.html -- Matt Roper Graphics Software Engineer VTT-OSGC Platform Enablement Intel Corporation (916) 356-2795
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for series starting with [v2,1/2] drm/i915/buddy: add some pretty printing
Re-reported. Following bugs are filed #4007 SNB: igt@gem_ppgtt@blt-vs-render-ctxn - fail - VM Periodic Tas invoked oom-killer #4008 TGL: igt@gem_spin_batch@legacy@bsd1 - incomplete - No logs Lakshmi. -Original Message- From: Matthew Auld Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2021 6:31 AM To: Intel Graphics Development Cc: Auld, Matthew ; Vudum, Lakshminarayana Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for series starting with [v2,1/2] drm/i915/buddy: add some pretty printing On Thu, 19 Aug 2021 at 14:04, Patchwork wrote: > > Patch Details > Series:series starting with [v2,1/2] drm/i915/buddy: add some pretty > printing URL:https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/93819/ > State:failure > Details:https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20853/index > .html > > CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_10498_full -> Patchwork_20853_full > > Summary > > FAILURE > > Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_20853_full absolutely > need to be verified manually. > > If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes > introduced in Patchwork_20853_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_20853_full: > > IGT changes > > Possible regressions > > igt@gem_ppgtt@blt-vs-render-ctxn: > > shard-snb: PASS -> FAIL > > igt@gem_spin_batch@legacy@bsd1: > > shard-tglb: PASS -> INCOMPLETE Lakshmi, these are unrelated to this series.
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915: Ditch the i915_gem_ww_ctx loop member (rev2)
Re-reported. Bug filed for the regression. #4009 igt@kms_atomic_transition@plane-toggle-modeset-transition - incomplete - No warnings/errors Lakshmi. -Original Message- From: Matthew Auld Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2021 6:40 AM To: Intel Graphics Development Cc: Thomas Hellström ; Vudum, Lakshminarayana Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915: Ditch the i915_gem_ww_ctx loop member (rev2) On Tue, 17 Aug 2021 at 18:28, Patchwork wrote: > > Patch Details > Series:drm/i915: Ditch the i915_gem_ww_ctx loop member (rev2) > URL:https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/93711/ > State:failure > Details:https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20834/index > .html > > CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_10490_full -> Patchwork_20834_full > > Summary > > FAILURE > > Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_20834_full absolutely > need to be verified manually. > > If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes > introduced in Patchwork_20834_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_20834_full: > > IGT changes > > Possible regressions > > igt@kms_atomic_transition@plane-toggle-modeset-transition: > > shard-tglb: PASS -> INCOMPLETE Lakshmi, this failure is unrelated.
Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/dp: return proper DPRX link training result
Here is the gitlab issue https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/4002 Lakshmi. -Original Message- From: Saarinen, Jani Sent: Monday, August 23, 2021 1:39 AM To: Ville Syrjälä ; Deak, Imre ; Vudum, Lakshminarayana Cc: Lee, Shawn C ; Almahallawy, Khaled ; intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Chiou, Cooper ; Tseng, William Subject: RE: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/dp: return proper DPRX link training result Hi, > -Original Message- > From: Intel-gfx On Behalf Of > Ville Syrjälä > Sent: lauantai 21. elokuuta 2021 1.20 > To: Deak, Imre > Cc: Lee, Shawn C ; Almahallawy, Khaled > ; intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; > Chiou, Cooper ; Tseng, William > > Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/dp: return proper DPRX link > training result > > On Wed, Aug 18, 2021 at 07:17:12PM +0300, Imre Deak wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 18, 2021 at 06:09:43PM +0300, Lee, Shawn C wrote: > > > On Tue, 2021-07-07, Lee Shawn C wrote: > > > >On Tue, 2021-07-07, Almahallawy, Khaled > > > > > wrote: > > > >>I believe Imre's LT fallback: > > > >>https://github.com/ideak/linux/commits/linktraining-fallback-fix > > > >>and Chrome > user space fix: > > > >>https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/300348 > > > >>7 should address Chrome concerns for LT failure and LTTPRs > > > >> > > > > > > > >Thanks for comment! The new fallback patch should help on this DPRX > > > >problem. > > > >One more thing. If driver did not handle DPRX link train failed properly. > > > >It would impact link layer compliance test case in below. > > > > > > > >400.3.1.3 > > > >400.3.1.4 > > > >400.3.1.6 > > > >400.3.1.12 > > > >400.3.1.13 > > > >400.3.1.14 > > > > > > > >Best regards, > > > >Shawn > > > > > > > > > > Hi all, before Imre's patch series land on upstream driver. The > > > link train failed handling works for LTTPR only. But DPRX does > > > not. Could you please consider to have this change as temporary solution? > > > Thanks! > > > > I sent already fixing this, see > > https://lore.kernel.org/intel-gfx/20201027133600.3656665-1-imre.deak > > @i > > ntel.com/ > > > > but it fell through the cracks. Applied now your patch, thanks. > > We seem to have a tgl that fails consistently at DPRX link training: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/fi-tgl-1115g4.html Yes, @Vudum, Lakshminarayana what is gitlab issue for this? [Lakshmi] https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/4002 > > Previously the error went unnoticed. > > -- > Ville Syrjälä > Intel
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915, drm/ttm: Update the ttm_move_memcpy() interface (rev3)
Re-reported. Lakshmi. From: Thomas Hellström Sent: Monday, August 23, 2021 12:07 AM To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Vudum, Lakshminarayana Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915, drm/ttm: Update the ttm_move_memcpy() interface (rev3) On Fri, 2021-08-13 at 20:28 +, Patchwork wrote: Patch Details Series: drm/i915, drm/ttm: Update the ttm_move_memcpy() interface (rev3) URL: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/91893/ State: failure Details: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20819/index.html CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_10482_full -> Patchwork_20819_full Summary FAILURE Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_20819_full absolutely need to be verified manually. If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes introduced in Patchwork_20819_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_20819_full: IGT changes Possible regressions * igt@kms_cursor_legacy@2x-long-cursor-vs-flip-atomic: * shard-glk: PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10482/shard-glk8/igt@kms_cursor_leg...@2x-long-cursor-vs-flip-atomic.html> -> FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20819/shard-glk5/igt@kms_cursor_leg...@2x-long-cursor-vs-flip-atomic.html> Lakshmi, this failure is unrelated. Thanks, Thomas
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/adlp: Add support for remapping CCS FBs
Filed https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/4034 and re-reproted the issue igt@i915_selftest@live@gt_timelines - incomplete - live_hwsp_engine failed with error -22 Lakshmi. -Original Message- From: Deak, Imre Sent: Friday, August 27, 2021 10:46 AM To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Vudum, Lakshminarayana Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/adlp: Add support for remapping CCS FBs Hi, On Fri, Aug 27, 2021 at 04:53:38PM +, Patchwork wrote: > == Series Details == > > Series: drm/i915/adlp: Add support for remapping CCS FBs > URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/94108/ > State : failure > > == Summary == > > CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_10530 -> Patchwork_20911 > > > Summary > --- > > **FAILURE** > > Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_20911 absolutely need to be > verified manually. > > If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes > introduced in Patchwork_20911, please notify your bug team to allow them > to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI. > > External URL: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20911/index.html > > Possible new issues > --- > > Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in > Patchwork_20911: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Possible regressions > > * igt@i915_selftest@live@gt_timelines: > - fi-rkl-guc: [PASS][1] -> [INCOMPLETE][2] >[1]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10530/fi-rkl-guc/igt@i915_selftest@live@gt_timelines.html >[2]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20911/fi-rkl-guc/ig > t@i915_selftest@live@gt_timelines.html Not sure how would this be related. On RKL nothing should change and I can't see any obvious KMS related issues in the log. This looks similar to https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20904/fi-rkl-guc/igt@i915_selftest@l...@hangcheck.html few days back, and it looks the same issue as https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Trybot_7964/fi-rkl-guc/igt@i915_selftest@live@gt_timelines.html from yesterday. > Known issues > > > Here are the changes found in Patchwork_20911 that come from known issues: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Issues hit > > * igt@amdgpu/amd_basic@cs-gfx: > - fi-kbl-soraka: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][3] ([fdo#109271]) +17 similar > issues >[3]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20911/fi-kbl-soraka > /igt@amdgpu/amd_ba...@cs-gfx.html > > * igt@core_hotunplug@unbind-rebind: > - fi-tgl-1115g4: NOTRUN -> [DMESG-WARN][4] ([i915#1982] / > [i915#4002]) >[4]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20911/fi-tgl-1115g4 > /igt@core_hotunp...@unbind-rebind.html > > * igt@gem_huc_copy@huc-copy: > - fi-tgl-1115g4: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][5] ([i915#2190]) >[5]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20911/fi-tgl-1115g4 > /igt@gem_huc_c...@huc-copy.html > > * igt@i915_pm_backlight@basic-brightness: > - fi-tgl-1115g4: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][6] ([i915#1155]) >[6]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20911/fi-tgl-1115g4 > /igt@i915_pm_backli...@basic-brightness.html > > * igt@i915_pm_rpm@module-reload: > - fi-tgl-1115g4: NOTRUN -> [INCOMPLETE][7] ([i915#1385] / > [i915#4006]) >[7]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20911/fi-tgl-1115g4 > /igt@i915_pm_...@module-reload.html > > * igt@kms_addfb_basic@too-wide: > - fi-tgl-1115g4: NOTRUN -> [DMESG-WARN][8] ([i915#4002]) +88 similar > issues >[8]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20911/fi-tgl-1115g4 > /igt@kms_addfb_ba...@too-wide.html > > * igt@kms_chamelium@common-hpd-after-suspend: > - fi-tgl-1115g4: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][9] ([fdo#111827]) +8 similar issues >[9]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20911/fi-tgl-1115g4 > /igt@kms_chamel...@common-hpd-after-suspend.html > > * igt@kms_force_connector_basic@force-load-detect: > - fi-tgl-1115g4: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][10] ([fdo#109285]) >[10]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20911/fi-tgl-1115g4 > /igt@kms_force_connector_ba...@force-load-detect.html > > * igt@kms_psr@primary_mmap_gtt: > - fi-tgl-1115g4: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][11] ([i915#1072]) +3 similar issues >[11]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20911/fi-tgl-1115g4 > /igt@kms_psr@primary_mmap_gtt.html >
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/gem: Fix the mman selftest (rev2)
Re-reported. From: Thomas Hellström Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2021 6:29 AM To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Vudum, Lakshminarayana Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/gem: Fix the mman selftest (rev2) On 8/31/21 3:19 PM, Patchwork wrote: Patch Details Series: drm/i915/gem: Fix the mman selftest (rev2) URL: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/94062/ State: failure Details: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20928/index.html CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_10539 -> Patchwork_20928 Summary FAILURE Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_20928 absolutely need to be verified manually. If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes introduced in Patchwork_20928, please notify your bug team to allow them to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI. External URL: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20928/index.html Possible new issues Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in Patchwork_20928: IGT changes Possible regressions * igt@kms_pipe_crc_basic@compare-crc-sanitycheck-pipe-b: * fi-rkl-guc: PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10539/fi-rkl-guc/igt@kms_pipe_crc_ba...@compare-crc-sanitycheck-pipe-b.html> -> SKIP<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20928/fi-rkl-guc/igt@kms_pipe_crc_ba...@compare-crc-sanitycheck-pipe-b.html> Lakshmi, this failure is unrelated. Thanks, Thomas
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/hdcp: Dsiplay13 HDCP support over MST (rev2)
Re-reported.
From: Gupta, Anshuman
Sent: Tuesday, July 6, 2021 7:51 AM
To: Vudum, Lakshminarayana
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: RE: ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/hdcp: Dsiplay13 HDCP support
over MST (rev2)
Hi Lakshmi
Below BAT failures are not related to HDCP at all.
igt@gem_exec_fence@basic-busy@vcs0:
fi-kbl-7567u:
PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10305/fi-kbl-7567u/igt@gem_exec_fence@basic-b...@vcs0.html>
->
DMESG-WARN<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20530/fi-kbl-7567u/igt@gem_exec_fence@basic-b...@vcs0.html>
igt@gem_exec_parallel@engines@basic:
fi-icl-y:
PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10305/fi-icl-y/igt@gem_exec_parallel@engi...@basic.html>
->
DMESG-WARN<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20530/fi-icl-y/igt@gem_exec_parallel@engi...@basic.html>
igt@i915_selftest@live@execlists:
fi-bdw-5557u: NOTRUN ->
DMESG-FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20530/fi-bdw-5557u/igt@i915_selftest@l...@execlists.html>
Could you please rise the bug for above failures and re-report the results.
Thanks,
Anshuman Gupta.
From: Patchwork
mailto:patchw...@emeril.freedesktop.org>>
Sent: Monday, July 5, 2021 7:03 PM
To: Gupta, Anshuman mailto:anshuman.gu...@intel.com>>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org<mailto:intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
Subject: ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/hdcp: Dsiplay13 HDCP support over
MST (rev2)
Patch Details
Series:
drm/i915/hdcp: Dsiplay13 HDCP support over MST (rev2)
URL:
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/92202/
State:
failure
Details:
https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20530/index.html
CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_10305 -> Patchwork_20530
Summary
FAILURE
Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_20530 absolutely need to be
verified manually.
If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
introduced in Patchwork_20530, please notify your bug team to allow them
to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI.
External URL:
https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20530/index.html
Possible new issues
Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in Patchwork_20530:
IGT changes
Possible regressions
* igt@gem_exec_fence@basic-busy@vcs0:
* fi-kbl-7567u:
PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10305/fi-kbl-7567u/igt@gem_exec_fence@basic-b...@vcs0.html>
->
DMESG-WARN<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20530/fi-kbl-7567u/igt@gem_exec_fence@basic-b...@vcs0.html>
* igt@gem_exec_parallel@engines@basic:
* fi-icl-y:
PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10305/fi-icl-y/igt@gem_exec_parallel@engi...@basic.html>
->
DMESG-WARN<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20530/fi-icl-y/igt@gem_exec_parallel@engi...@basic.html>
* igt@i915_selftest@live@execlists:
* fi-bdw-5557u: NOTRUN ->
DMESG-FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20530/fi-bdw-5557u/igt@i915_selftest@l...@execlists.html>
Warnings
* igt@i915_pm_rpm@module-reload:
* fi-ivb-3770:
SKIP<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10305/fi-ivb-3770/igt@i915_pm_...@module-reload.html>
(fdo#109271<https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109271>) ->
FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20530/fi-ivb-3770/igt@i915_pm_...@module-reload.html>
Suppressed
The following results come from untrusted machines, tests, or statuses.
They do not affect the overall result.
* igt@kms_pipe_crc_basic@hang-read-crc-pipe-a:
* {fi-tgl-1115g4}: NOTRUN ->
DMESG-WARN<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20530/fi-tgl-1115g4/igt@kms_pipe_crc_ba...@hang-read-crc-pipe-a.html>
Known issues
Here are the changes found in Patchwork_20530 that come from known issues:
IGT changes
Issues hit
* igt@amdgpu/amd_basic@cs-gfx:
* fi-hsw-4770: NOTRUN ->
SKIP<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20530/fi-hsw-4770/igt@amdgpu/amd_ba...@cs-gfx.html>
(fdo#109271<https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109271> /
fdo#109315<https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109315>) +17 similar
issues
* igt@amdgpu/amd_basic@semaphore:
* fi-bsw-nick: NOTRUN ->
SKIP<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20530/fi-bsw-nick/igt@amdgpu/amd_ba...@semaphore.html>
(fdo#109271<https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109271>) +17 similar
issues
* igt@core_hotunplug@unbind-rebind:
* fi-hsw-4770: NOTRUN ->
WARN<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20530/fi-hsw-4770/igt@core_hotunp...@unbind-rebind.html>
(i915#3718<https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/3718>)
* fi-bdw-5557u: NOTRUN -&
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/display/xelpd: Fix incorrect color capability reporting
Re-reported. From: Shankar, Uma Sent: Thursday, July 8, 2021 2:15 AM To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Vudum, Lakshminarayana ; Sarvela, Tomi P Subject: RE: ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/display/xelpd: Fix incorrect color capability reporting Adding Tomi as well. Hi Tomi, Can you please help report this failure, its unrelated to the change. We want to merge this to unblock CI and remove unwanted aborts. Thank & Regards, Uma Shankar From: Patchwork mailto:patchw...@emeril.freedesktop.org>> Sent: Wednesday, July 7, 2021 4:26 PM To: Shankar, Uma mailto:uma.shan...@intel.com>> Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org<mailto:intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org> Subject: ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/display/xelpd: Fix incorrect color capability reporting Patch Details Series: drm/i915/display/xelpd: Fix incorrect color capability reporting URL: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/92266/ State: failure Details: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20542/index.html CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_10308 -> Patchwork_20542 Summary FAILURE Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_20542 absolutely need to be verified manually. If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes introduced in Patchwork_20542, please notify your bug team to allow them to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI. External URL: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20542/index.html Possible new issues Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in Patchwork_20542: IGT changes Possible regressions * igt@runner@aborted: * fi-snb-2520m: NOTRUN -> FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20542/fi-snb-2520m/igt@run...@aborted.html> Hi Lakshmi, This is not related to the change. Can you please help report this. Regards, Uma Shankar Known issues Here are the changes found in Patchwork_20542 that come from known issues: IGT changes Issues hit * igt@core_hotunplug@unbind-rebind: * fi-bdw-5557u: NOTRUN -> WARN<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20542/fi-bdw-5557u/igt@core_hotunp...@unbind-rebind.html> (i915#3718<https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/3718>) * igt@gem_huc_copy@huc-copy: * fi-kbl-x1275: NOTRUN -> SKIP<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20542/fi-kbl-x1275/igt@gem_huc_c...@huc-copy.html> (fdo#109271<https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109271> / i915#2190<https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/2190>) * fi-skl-guc: NOTRUN -> SKIP<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20542/fi-skl-guc/igt@gem_huc_c...@huc-copy.html> (fdo#109271<https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109271> / i915#2190<https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/2190>) * fi-kbl-7567u: NOTRUN -> SKIP<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20542/fi-kbl-7567u/igt@gem_huc_c...@huc-copy.html> (fdo#109271<https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109271> / i915#2190<https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/2190>) * fi-cfl-8109u: NOTRUN -> SKIP<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20542/fi-cfl-8109u/igt@gem_huc_c...@huc-copy.html> (fdo#109271<https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109271> / i915#2190<https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/2190>) * igt@kms_chamelium@common-hpd-after-suspend: * fi-kbl-7500u: PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10308/fi-kbl-7500u/igt@kms_chamel...@common-hpd-after-suspend.html> -> FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20542/fi-kbl-7500u/igt@kms_chamel...@common-hpd-after-suspend.html> (i915#3449<https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/3449>) * igt@kms_chamelium@dp-crc-fast: * fi-kbl-7500u: PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10308/fi-kbl-7500u/igt@kms_chamel...@dp-crc-fast.html> -> FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20542/fi-kbl-7500u/igt@kms_chamel...@dp-crc-fast.html> (i915#1372<https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/1372>) * fi-skl-guc: NOTRUN -> SKIP<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20542/fi-skl-guc/igt@kms_chamel...@dp-crc-fast.html> (fdo#109271<https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109271> / fdo#111827<https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=111827>) +8 similar issues * fi-kbl-7567u: NOTRUN -> SKIP<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20542/fi-kbl-7567u/igt@kms_chamel...@dp-crc-fast.html> (fdo#109271<https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109271> / fdo#111827<https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=111827>) +8 similar issues * igt@kms_chamelium@hdmi-crc-fast: *
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915: Fix wm params for ccs
Re-reported.
From: Juha-Pekka Heikkilä
Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2021 12:58 AM
To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Vudum, Lakshminarayana
Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915: Fix wm params for ccs
Hi Lakshmi,
Here would be again one false positive result.
/Juha-Pekka
On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 7:38 AM Patchwork
mailto:patchw...@emeril.freedesktop.org>>
wrote:
Patch Details
Series:
drm/i915: Fix wm params for ccs
URL:
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/92491/
State:
failure
Details:
https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20589/index.html
CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_10342_full -> Patchwork_20589_full
Summary
FAILURE
Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_20589_full absolutely need to be
verified manually.
If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
introduced in Patchwork_20589_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_20589_full:
IGT changes
Possible regressions
* igt@dumb_buffer@map-invalid-size:
* shard-apl: NOTRUN ->
DMESG-WARN<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20589/shard-apl6/igt@dumb_buf...@map-invalid-size.html>
Suppressed
The following results come from untrusted machines, tests, or statuses.
They do not affect the overall result.
* igt@kms_dither@fb-8bpc-vs-panel-6bpc:
* {shard-rkl}: NOTRUN ->
SKIP<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20589/shard-rkl-5/igt@kms_dit...@fb-8bpc-vs-panel-6bpc.html>
* igt@runner@aborted:
* {shard-rkl}:
(FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10342/shard-rkl-5/igt@run...@aborted.html>,
FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10342/shard-rkl-6/igt@run...@aborted.html>,
FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10342/shard-rkl-2/igt@run...@aborted.html>,
FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10342/shard-rkl-5/igt@run...@aborted.html>,
FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10342/shard-rkl-5/igt@run...@aborted.html>)
([i915#3002] / [i915#3728]) ->
(FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20589/shard-rkl-2/igt@run...@aborted.html>,
FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20589/shard-rkl-1/igt@run...@aborted.html>,
FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20589/shard-rkl-5/igt@run...@aborted.html>,
FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20589/shard-rkl-1/igt@run...@aborted.html>)
([i915#3002])
Known issues
Here are the changes found in Patchwork_20589_full that come from known issues:
IGT changes
Issues hit
* igt@gem_create@create-massive:
* shard-snb: NOTRUN ->
DMESG-WARN<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20589/shard-snb7/igt@gem_cre...@create-massive.html>
([i915#3002])
* igt@gem_ctx_persistence@legacy-engines-cleanup:
* shard-snb: NOTRUN ->
SKIP<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20589/shard-snb2/igt@gem_ctx_persiste...@legacy-engines-cleanup.html>
([fdo#109271] / [i915#1099]) +3 similar issues
* igt@gem_ctx_persistence@legacy-engines-hang@blt:
* shard-skl: NOTRUN ->
SKIP<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20589/shard-skl6/igt@gem_ctx_persistence@legacy-engines-h...@blt.html>
([fdo#109271]) +119 similar issues
* igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-deadline:
* shard-apl: NOTRUN ->
FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20589/shard-apl2/igt@gem_exec_f...@basic-deadline.html>
([i915#2846])
* igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace-share@rcs0:
* shard-tglb:
PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10342/shard-tglb7/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace-sh...@rcs0.html>
->
FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20589/shard-tglb6/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace-sh...@rcs0.html>
([i915#2842])
* igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-throttle@rcs0:
* shard-glk:
PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10342/shard-glk5/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-throt...@rcs0.html>
->
FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20589/shard-glk6/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-throt...@rcs0.html>
([i915#2842])
* shard-iclb:
PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10342/shard-iclb5/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-throt...@rcs0.html>
->
FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20589/shard-iclb6/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-throt...@rcs0.html>
([i915#2849])
* igt@gem_exec_reloc@basic-wide-active@rcs0:
* shard-snb: NOTRUN ->
FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20589/shard-snb6/igt@gem_exec_reloc@basic-wide-act...@rcs0.html>
([i915#3633]) +2 s
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for HDMI2.1 PCON Misc Fixes (rev5)
Re-reported. -Original Message- From: Nautiyal, Ankit K Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2021 5:14 AM To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Vudum, Lakshminarayana Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for HDMI2.1 PCON Misc Fixes (rev5) Hi Lakshmi, igt@kms_chamelium@hdmi-hpd-fast: * fi-icl-u2: PASS <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_9885/fi-icl-u2/igt@kms_chamel...@hdmi-hpd-fast.html> -> DMESG-WARN <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_19838/fi-icl-u2/igt@kms_chamel...@hdmi-hpd-fast.html> This is existing issue https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/2868 Regards, Ankit On 3/23/2021 9:03 PM, Patchwork wrote: > Project List - Patchwork *Patch Details* > *Series:* HDMI2.1 PCON Misc Fixes (rev5) > *URL:*https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/86677/ > <https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/86677/> > *State:* failure > *Details:* > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_19838/index.html > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_19838/index.html> > > > CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_9885 -> Patchwork_19838 > > > Summary > > *FAILURE* > > Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_19838 absolutely need to be > verified manually. > > If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes > introduced in Patchwork_19838, please notify your bug team to allow them > to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives > in CI. > > External URL: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_19838/index.html > > > Possible new issues > > Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in > Patchwork_19838: > > > IGT changes > > > Possible regressions > > * igt@kms_chamelium@hdmi-hpd-fast: > o fi-icl-u2: PASS > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_9885/fi-icl-u2/igt@kms_chamel...@hdmi-hpd-fast.html> > -> DMESG-WARN > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_19838/fi-icl-u2/igt@kms_chamel...@hdmi-hpd-fast.html> > > > Known issues > > Here are the changes found in Patchwork_19838 that come from known issues: > > > IGT changes > > > Issues hit > > * > > igt@amdgpu/amd_prime@amd-to-i915: > > o fi-kbl-8809g: NOTRUN -> DMESG-WARN > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_19838/fi-kbl-8809g/igt@amdgpu/amd_pr...@amd-to-i915.html> > (i915#2947 <https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/2947>) > * > > igt@gem_exec_suspend@basic-s0: > > o fi-kbl-soraka: PASS > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_9885/fi-kbl-soraka/igt@gem_exec_susp...@basic-s0.html> > -> INCOMPLETE > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_19838/fi-kbl-soraka/igt@gem_exec_susp...@basic-s0.html> > (i915#155 <https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/155>) > * > > igt@gem_mmap_gtt@basic: > > o fi-tgl-y: PASS > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_9885/fi-tgl-y/igt@gem_mmap_...@basic.html> > -> DMESG-WARN > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_19838/fi-tgl-y/igt@gem_mmap_...@basic.html> > (i915#402 > <https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/402>) +2 > similar issues > * > > igt@runner@aborted: > > o fi-kbl-8809g: NOTRUN -> FAIL > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_19838/fi-kbl-8809g/igt@run...@aborted.html> > (i915#2947 <https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/2947>) > > > Possible fixes > > * > > igt@gem_exec_gttfill@basic: > > o fi-kbl-8809g: TIMEOUT > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_9885/fi-kbl-8809g/igt@gem_exec_gttf...@basic.html> > (i915#3145 > <https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/3145>) -> > PASS > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_19838/fi-kbl-8809g/igt@gem_exec_gttf...@basic.html> > * > > igt@gem_exec_suspend@basic-s3: > > o fi-tgl-y: DMESG-WARN > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_9885/fi-tgl-y/igt@gem_exec_susp...@basic-s3.html> > (i915#2411 > <https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/2411> / > i915#402 > <https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/402>) -> PASS > > &
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.DOCS: warning for vfio/pci: Add support for opregion v2.0+ (rev5)
Failure is reported. It's now showing as success. -Original Message- From: Gao, Fred Sent: Monday, March 29, 2021 12:12 AM To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Vudum, Lakshminarayana Cc: Wang, Zhenyu Z Subject: RE: ✗ Fi.CI.DOCS: warning for vfio/pci: Add support for opregion v2.0+ (rev5) Hi, Lakshmi: Can u help on this failure again, the only difference between version 5& 4 is the comments. Thanks in advance. > -Original Message- > From: Patchwork > Sent: Friday, March 26, 2021 5:05 AM > To: Gao, Fred > Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > Subject: ✗ Fi.CI.DOCS: warning for vfio/pci: Add support for opregion > v2.0+ > (rev5) > > == Series Details == > > Series: vfio/pci: Add support for opregion v2.0+ (rev5) > URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/84494/ > State : warning > > == Summary == > > $ make htmldocs 2>&1 > /dev/null | grep i915 > ./drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_shrinker.c:102: warning: Function > parameter or member 'ww' not described in 'i915_gem_shrink' > ./drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_cmd_parser.c:1420: warning: Excess > function parameter 'trampoline' description in 'intel_engine_cmd_parser' > ./drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_cmd_parser.c:1420: warning: Function > parameter or member 'jump_whitelist' not described in > 'intel_engine_cmd_parser' > ./drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_cmd_parser.c:1420: warning: Function > parameter or member 'shadow_map' not described in > 'intel_engine_cmd_parser' > ./drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_cmd_parser.c:1420: warning: Function > parameter or member 'batch_map' not described in > 'intel_engine_cmd_parser' > ./drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_cmd_parser.c:1420: warning: Excess > function parameter 'trampoline' description in 'intel_engine_cmd_parser' > /home/cidrm/kernel/Documentation/gpu/i915:22: ./drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i > ntel_runtime_pm.c:423: WARNING: Inline strong start-string without > end- string. > ___ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.DOCS: warning for vfio/pci: Add support for opregion v2.0+ (rev5)
That's a warning. For now, nothing we can do about that. -Original Message- From: Gao, Fred Sent: Monday, March 29, 2021 9:23 AM To: Vudum, Lakshminarayana ; intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org Cc: Wang, Zhenyu Z Subject: RE: ✗ Fi.CI.DOCS: warning for vfio/pci: Add support for opregion v2.0+ (rev5) Thanks for the quick help. Test of Fi.CI.DOCS is still failed although we do not change any code in i915. > -Original Message- > From: Vudum, Lakshminarayana > Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2021 12:20 AM > To: Gao, Fred ; intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > Cc: Wang, Zhenyu Z > Subject: RE: ✗ Fi.CI.DOCS: warning for vfio/pci: Add support for > opregion v2.0+ (rev5) > > Failure is reported. It's now showing as success. > > -Original Message- > From: Gao, Fred > Sent: Monday, March 29, 2021 12:12 AM > To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Vudum, Lakshminarayana > > Cc: Wang, Zhenyu Z > Subject: RE: ✗ Fi.CI.DOCS: warning for vfio/pci: Add support for > opregion v2.0+ (rev5) > > Hi, Lakshmi: > > Can u help on this failure again, > the only difference between version 5& 4 is the comments. > Thanks in advance. > > > -Original Message- > > From: Patchwork > > Sent: Friday, March 26, 2021 5:05 AM > > To: Gao, Fred > > Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > > Subject: ✗ Fi.CI.DOCS: warning for vfio/pci: Add support for > > opregion v2.0+ > > (rev5) > > > > == Series Details == > > > > Series: vfio/pci: Add support for opregion v2.0+ (rev5) > > URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/84494/ > > State : warning > > > > == Summary == > > > > $ make htmldocs 2>&1 > /dev/null | grep i915 > > ./drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_shrinker.c:102: warning: > > Function parameter or member 'ww' not described in 'i915_gem_shrink' > > ./drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_cmd_parser.c:1420: warning: Excess > > function parameter 'trampoline' description in 'intel_engine_cmd_parser' > > ./drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_cmd_parser.c:1420: warning: Function > > parameter or member 'jump_whitelist' not described in > > 'intel_engine_cmd_parser' > > ./drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_cmd_parser.c:1420: warning: Function > > parameter or member 'shadow_map' not described in > > 'intel_engine_cmd_parser' > > ./drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_cmd_parser.c:1420: warning: Function > > parameter or member 'batch_map' not described in > > 'intel_engine_cmd_parser' > > ./drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_cmd_parser.c:1420: warning: Excess > > function parameter 'trampoline' description in 'intel_engine_cmd_parser' > > > /home/cidrm/kernel/Documentation/gpu/i915:22: ./drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i > > ntel_runtime_pm.c:423: WARNING: Inline strong start-string without > > end- string. > > > > ___ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915: Add support for FBs requiring a POT stride padding (rev4)
Re-reported.
-Original Message-
From: Deak, Imre
Sent: Monday, March 29, 2021 8:47 AM
To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Vudum, Lakshminarayana
Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915: Add support for FBs requiring a
POT stride padding (rev4)
Hi Lakshmi,
On Sun, Mar 28, 2021 at 12:22:46AM +, Patchwork wrote:
> == Series Details ==
>
> Series: drm/i915: Add support for FBs requiring a POT stride padding (rev4)
> URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/87859/
> State : failure
>
> == Summary ==
>
> CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_9909_full -> Patchwork_19873_full
>
>
> Summary
> ---
>
> **FAILURE**
>
> Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_19873_full absolutely need to
> be
> verified manually.
>
> If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
> introduced in Patchwork_19873_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_19873_full:
>
> ### IGT changes ###
>
> Possible regressions
>
> * igt@gem_ctx_ringsize@active@bcs0:
> - shard-skl: [PASS][1] -> [INCOMPLETE][2]
>[1]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_9909/shard-skl8/igt@gem_ctx_ringsize@act...@bcs0.html
>[2]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_19873/shard-skl7/ig
> t@gem_ctx_ringsize@act...@bcs0.html
This is
<5> [538.363114] Fence expiration time out
i915-:00:02.0:gem_ctx_ringsiz[5142]:7e20!
> * igt@gem_userptr_blits@vma-merge:
> - shard-apl: NOTRUN -> [FAIL][3]
>[3]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_19873/shard-apl1/ig
> t@gem_userptr_bl...@vma-merge.html
and this one is
<5>[ 102.393743] Fence expiration time out
i915-:00:02.0:gem_userptr_bli[1018]:2!
The same timeouts happen now on all IGT runs, see
[Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915: Don't zero out the Y
plane's watermarks and
[Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for Introduce Intel PXP (rev3)
Looks like it is happening since the
drm/i915: Fail too long user submissions by default
commit merged on Friday.
I'm quite sure now that this change should not affect anything (the remapping
feature is disabled for now). Could we add a ticket for these failures as a
known issue?
> ### Piglit changes ###
>
> Possible regressions
>
> *
> spec@arb_tessellation_shader@execution@built-in-functions@tcs-op-assign-lshift-uvec2-uvec2
> (NEW):
> - {pig-icl-1065g7}: NOTRUN -> [CRASH][4]
>[4]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_19873/pig-icl-1065g
> 7/spec@arb_tessellation_shader@execution@built-in-functions@tcs-op-ass
> ign-lshift-uvec2-uvec2.html
>
> *
> spec@arb_tessellation_shader@execution@built-in-functions@tcs-op-bitor-neg-uint-uint
> (NEW):
> - {pig-icl-1065g7}: NOTRUN -> [INCOMPLETE][5] +7 similar issues
>[5]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_19873/pig-icl-1065g
> 7/spec@arb_tessellation_shader@execution@built-in-functions@tcs-op-bit
> or-neg-uint-uint.html
These are new tests, not sure why they are reported as a regression.
Something similar also was reported on
Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915: Don't zero out the Y
plane's watermarks
The tests don't seem to do any modesets (the remapping is disabled in any case
in the change), so I can't see how the failures would be related. Can we open
tickets for these too?
Thanks,
Imre
> New tests
> -
>
> New tests have been introduced between CI_DRM_9909_full and
> Patchwork_19873_full:
>
> ### New Piglit tests (9) ###
>
> * spec@arb_tessellation_shader@execution@built-in-functions@tcs-asin-vec2:
> - Statuses : 1 incomplete(s)
> - Exec time: [0.0] s
>
> *
> spec@arb_tessellation_shader@execution@built-in-functions@tcs-degrees-vec4:
> - Statuses : 1 incomplete(s)
> - Exec time: [0.0] s
>
> *
> spec@arb_tessellation_shader@execution@built-in-functions@tcs-op-assign-lshift-uvec2-uvec2:
> - Statuses : 1 crash(s)
> - Exec time: [0.50] s
>
> *
> spec@arb_tessellation_shader@execution@built-in-functions@tcs-op-assign-rshift-uint-uint:
> - Statuses : 1 incomplete(s)
> - Exec time: [0.0] s
>
> *
> spec@arb_tessellation_shader@execution@built-in-functions@tcs-op-bitor-neg-uint-uint:
> - Statuses :
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915: Uninit the DMC FW loader state during shutdown
Re-reported yesterday. All good. -Original Message- From: Deak, Imre Sent: Thursday, April 1, 2021 3:41 PM To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Sang, Oliver ; Xing Zhengjun ; Ville Syrjälä ; Baker, Edward Cc: Vudum, Lakshminarayana Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915: Uninit the DMC FW loader state during shutdown On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 05:42:07PM +, Patchwork wrote: > == Series Details == > > Series: drm/i915: Uninit the DMC FW loader state during shutdown > URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/87883/ > State : failure Thanks for the reports testing and review, patch pushed to -din. One unrelated failure, see below. > > == Summary == > > CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_9849_full -> Patchwork_19781_full > > > Summary > --- > > **FAILURE** > > Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_19781_full absolutely need to > be > verified manually. > > If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes > introduced in Patchwork_19781_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_19781_full: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Possible regressions > > * igt@perf_pmu@rc6-suspend: > - shard-tglb: [PASS][1] -> [INCOMPLETE][2] >[1]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_9849/shard-tglb5/igt@perf_...@rc6-suspend.html >[2]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_19781/shard-tglb8/i > gt@perf_...@rc6-suspend.html The changes in the patch have an effect only during shutdown and reboot so can't be related to the above failure. > Warnings > > * igt@gem_exec_reloc@basic-parallel: > - shard-kbl: [TIMEOUT][3] ([i915#1729]) -> [TIMEOUT][4] >[3]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_9849/shard-kbl6/igt@gem_exec_re...@basic-parallel.html >[4]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_19781/shard-kbl6/igt@gem_exec_re...@basic-parallel.html > - shard-tglb: [TIMEOUT][5] ([i915#1729]) -> [TIMEOUT][6] >[5]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_9849/shard-tglb7/igt@gem_exec_re...@basic-parallel.html >[6]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_19781/shard-tglb5/igt@gem_exec_re...@basic-parallel.html > - shard-skl: [TIMEOUT][7] ([i915#1729]) -> [TIMEOUT][8] >[7]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_9849/shard-skl4/igt@gem_exec_re...@basic-parallel.html >[8]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_19781/shard-skl6/igt@gem_exec_re...@basic-parallel.html > - shard-apl: [TIMEOUT][9] ([i915#1729]) -> [TIMEOUT][10] >[9]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_9849/shard-apl2/igt@gem_exec_re...@basic-parallel.html >[10]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_19781/shard-apl3/igt@gem_exec_re...@basic-parallel.html > - shard-iclb: [TIMEOUT][11] ([i915#1729]) -> [TIMEOUT][12] >[11]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_9849/shard-iclb5/igt@gem_exec_re...@basic-parallel.html >[12]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_19781/shard-iclb3/igt@gem_exec_re...@basic-parallel.html > - shard-glk: [TIMEOUT][13] ([i915#1729]) -> [TIMEOUT][14] >[13]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_9849/shard-glk7/igt@gem_exec_re...@basic-parallel.html >[14]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_19781/shard-glk8/ig > t@gem_exec_re...@basic-parallel.html > > > Known issues > > > Here are the changes found in Patchwork_19781_full that come from known > issues: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Issues hit > > * igt@gem_create@create-massive: > - shard-iclb: NOTRUN -> [DMESG-WARN][15] ([i915#3002]) >[15]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_19781/shard-iclb1/igt@gem_cre...@create-massive.html > - shard-skl: NOTRUN -> [DMESG-WARN][16] ([i915#3002]) >[16]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_19781/shard-skl2/ig > t@gem_cre...@create-massive.html > > * igt@gem_ctx_persistence@clone: > - shard-snb: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][17] ([fdo#109271] / [i915#1099]) > +4 similar issues >[17]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_19781/shard-snb5/ig > t@gem_ctx_persiste...@clone.html >
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915: Simplify CCS and UV plane alignment handling
I don't see any regression on rev 2. Lakshmi. -Original Message- From: Deak, Imre Sent: Monday, April 26, 2021 8:00 AM To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Heikkila, Juha-pekka ; Ville Syrjälä ; Vudum, Lakshminarayana Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915: Simplify CCS and UV plane alignment handling On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 11:20:44PM +, Patchwork wrote: > == Series Details == > > Series: drm/i915: Simplify CCS and UV plane alignment handling > URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/89299/ > State : failure Thanks for the reviews, pushed to -din with a TODO: update about using a 4k linear UV plane alignment everywhere. Lakshmi, please see the unrelated failure below. > > == Summary == > > CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_9993_full -> Patchwork_19963_full > > > Summary > --- > > **FAILURE** > > Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_19963_full absolutely need to > be > verified manually. > > If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes > introduced in Patchwork_19963_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_19963_full: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Possible regressions > > * igt@gem_sync@basic-many-each: > - shard-iclb: [PASS][1] -> [INCOMPLETE][2] >[1]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_9993/shard-iclb4/igt@gem_s...@basic-many-each.html >[2]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_19963/shard-iclb2/i > gt@gem_s...@basic-many-each.html Starting subtest: basic-many-each runner: This test was killed due to a kernel taint (0x280). runner: This test was killed due to exceeding disk usage limit. (Used 23707386 bytes, limit 10485760) Looks like a test or CI config issue, do we have ticket for this? > Known issues > > > Here are the changes found in Patchwork_19963_full that come from known > issues: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Issues hit > > * igt@gem_ctx_persistence@file: > - shard-snb: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][3] ([fdo#109271] / [i915#1099]) >[3]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_19963/shard-snb5/ig > t@gem_ctx_persiste...@file.html > > * igt@gem_eio@in-flight-suspend: > - shard-apl: NOTRUN -> [DMESG-WARN][4] ([i915#180]) +1 similar > issue >[4]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_19963/shard-apl8/ig > t@gem_...@in-flight-suspend.html > > * igt@gem_eio@kms: > - shard-glk: [PASS][5] -> [FAIL][6] ([i915#3115]) >[5]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_9993/shard-glk4/igt@gem_...@kms.html >[6]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_19963/shard-glk8/ig > t@gem_...@kms.html > > * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-flow@rcs0: > - shard-skl: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][7] ([fdo#109271]) +84 similar > issues >[7]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_19963/shard-skl10/i > gt@gem_exec_fair@basic-f...@rcs0.html > > * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-share@rcs0: > - shard-tglb: [PASS][8] -> [FAIL][9] ([i915#2842]) +1 similar > issue >[8]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_9993/shard-tglb1/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-sh...@rcs0.html >[9]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_19963/shard-tglb5/i > gt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-sh...@rcs0.html > > * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace@rcs0: > - shard-kbl: [PASS][10] -> [FAIL][11] ([i915#2842]) +1 similar > issue >[10]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_9993/shard-kbl6/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-p...@rcs0.html >[11]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_19963/shard-kbl6/ig > t@gem_exec_fair@basic-p...@rcs0.html > > * igt@gem_exec_whisper@basic-queues-priority-all: > - shard-iclb: [PASS][12] -> [INCOMPLETE][13] ([i915#1895]) >[12]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_9993/shard-iclb7/igt@gem_exec_whis...@basic-queues-priority-all.html >[13]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_19963/shard-iclb7/i > gt@gem_exec_whis...@basic-queues-priority-all.html > > * igt@gem_huc_copy@huc-copy: > - shard-skl: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][14] ([fdo#109271] / [i915#2190]) >[14]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_19963/shard-skl
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915: Simplify CCS and UV plane alignment handling
I have addressed that now. -Original Message- From: Deak, Imre Sent: Monday, April 26, 2021 8:48 AM To: Vudum, Lakshminarayana Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Heikkila, Juha-pekka ; Ville Syrjälä Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915: Simplify CCS and UV plane alignment handling Lakshmi, ah that's true, so no need to re-report the result. In any case the failure of rev 1 on igt@gem_sync@basic-many-each was still unrelated to those changes, so if you still see that occuring again it's good to track it as a known issue. On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 06:40:56PM +0300, Vudum, Lakshminarayana wrote: > I don't see any regression on rev 2. > > Lakshmi. > > -Original Message- > From: Deak, Imre > Sent: Monday, April 26, 2021 8:00 AM > To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Heikkila, Juha-pekka > ; Ville Syrjälä > ; Vudum, Lakshminarayana > > Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915: Simplify CCS and UV > plane alignment handling > > On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 11:20:44PM +, Patchwork wrote: > > == Series Details == > > > > Series: drm/i915: Simplify CCS and UV plane alignment handling > > URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/89299/ > > State : failure > > Thanks for the reviews, pushed to -din with a TODO: update about using a 4k > linear UV plane alignment everywhere. > > Lakshmi, please see the unrelated failure below. > > > > > == Summary == > > > > CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_9993_full -> Patchwork_19963_full > > > > > > Summary > > --- > > > > **FAILURE** > > > > Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_19963_full absolutely need > > to be > > verified manually. > > > > If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes > > introduced in Patchwork_19963_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_19963_full: > > > > ### IGT changes ### > > > > Possible regressions > > > > * igt@gem_sync@basic-many-each: > > - shard-iclb: [PASS][1] -> [INCOMPLETE][2] > >[1]: > > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_9993/shard-iclb4/igt@gem_s...@basic-many-each.html > >[2]: > > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_19963/shard-iclb2 > > /i > > gt@gem_s...@basic-many-each.html > > Starting subtest: basic-many-each > runner: This test was killed due to a kernel taint (0x280). > runner: This test was killed due to exceeding disk usage limit. (Used > 23707386 bytes, limit 10485760) > > Looks like a test or CI config issue, do we have ticket for this? > > > > Known issues > > > > > > Here are the changes found in Patchwork_19963_full that come from known > > issues: > > > > ### IGT changes ### > > > > Issues hit > > > > * igt@gem_ctx_persistence@file: > > - shard-snb: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][3] ([fdo#109271] / [i915#1099]) > >[3]: > > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_19963/shard-snb5/ > > ig > > t@gem_ctx_persiste...@file.html > > > > * igt@gem_eio@in-flight-suspend: > > - shard-apl: NOTRUN -> [DMESG-WARN][4] ([i915#180]) +1 similar > > issue > >[4]: > > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_19963/shard-apl8/ > > ig > > t@gem_...@in-flight-suspend.html > > > > * igt@gem_eio@kms: > > - shard-glk: [PASS][5] -> [FAIL][6] ([i915#3115]) > >[5]: > > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_9993/shard-glk4/igt@gem_...@kms.html > >[6]: > > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_19963/shard-glk8/ > > ig > > t@gem_...@kms.html > > > > * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-flow@rcs0: > > - shard-skl: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][7] ([fdo#109271]) +84 similar > > issues > >[7]: > > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_19963/shard-skl10 > > /i gt@gem_exec_fair@basic-f...@rcs0.html > > > > * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-share@rcs0: > > - shard-tglb: [PASS][8] -> [FAIL][9] ([i915#2842]) +1 similar > > issue > >[8]: > > https:
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915: Fix wrong name announced on FB driver switching
Re-reported successfully. -Original Message- From: Janusz Krzysztofik Sent: Friday, April 30, 2021 1:18 AM To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org Cc: Vudum, Lakshminarayana Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915: Fix wrong name announced on FB driver switching On piątek, 30 kwietnia 2021 01:01:38 CEST Patchwork wrote: > == Series Details == > > Series: drm/i915: Fix wrong name announced on FB driver switching > URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/89663/ > State : failure > > == Summary == > > CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_10027_full -> Patchwork_20039_full > > > Summary > --- > > **FAILURE** > > Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_20039_full absolutely need to > be > verified manually. > > If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes > introduced in Patchwork_20039_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_20039_full: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Possible regressions > > * igt@kms_plane@plane-panning-bottom-right-pipe-b-planes: > - shard-tglb: [PASS][1] -> [DMESG-WARN][2] +4 similar issues >[1]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10027/shard-tglb3/igt@kms_pl...@plane-panning-bottom-right-pipe-b-planes.html >[2]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20039/shard-tglb5/i > gt@kms_pl...@plane-panning-bottom-right-pipe-b-planes.html False positive. The change only affects a notice sent to kernel log on FB switching, nothing else, then there is no possibility for any error messages in kernel log being related. Thanks, Janusz > > > Known issues > > > Here are the changes found in Patchwork_20039_full that come from known > issues: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Issues hit > > * igt@gem_create@create-clear: > - shard-glk: [PASS][3] -> [FAIL][4] ([i915#3160]) >[3]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10027/shard-glk8/igt@gem_cre...@create-clear.html >[4]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20039/shard-glk9/igt@gem_cre...@create-clear.html > - shard-skl: [PASS][5] -> [FAIL][6] ([i915#3160]) >[5]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10027/shard-skl9/igt@gem_cre...@create-clear.html >[6]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20039/shard-skl9/ig > t@gem_cre...@create-clear.html > > * igt@gem_create@create-massive: > - shard-apl: NOTRUN -> [DMESG-WARN][7] ([i915#3002]) >[7]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20039/shard-apl3/ig > t@gem_cre...@create-massive.html > > * igt@gem_ctx_persistence@legacy-engines-hostile@render: > - shard-iclb: [PASS][8] -> [FAIL][9] ([i915#2410]) >[8]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10027/shard-iclb6/igt@gem_ctx_persistence@legacy-engines-host...@render.html >[9]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20039/shard-iclb6/i > gt@gem_ctx_persistence@legacy-engines-host...@render.html > > * igt@gem_ctx_persistence@legacy-engines-queued: > - shard-snb: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][10] ([fdo#109271] / [i915#1099]) > +2 similar issues >[10]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20039/shard-snb5/ig > t@gem_ctx_persiste...@legacy-engines-queued.html > > * igt@gem_ctx_persistence@many-contexts: > - shard-tglb: [PASS][11] -> [FAIL][12] ([i915#2410]) >[11]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10027/shard-tglb6/igt@gem_ctx_persiste...@many-contexts.html >[12]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20039/shard-tglb2/i > gt@gem_ctx_persiste...@many-contexts.html > > * igt@gem_ctx_ringsize@active@bcs0: > - shard-skl: NOTRUN -> [INCOMPLETE][13] ([i915#3316]) >[13]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20039/shard-skl8/ig > t@gem_ctx_ringsize@act...@bcs0.html > > * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-deadline: > - shard-kbl: [PASS][14] -> [FAIL][15] ([i915#2846]) >[14]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10027/shard-kbl2/igt@gem_exec_f...@basic-deadline.html >[15]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20039/shard-kbl4/ig > t@gem_exec_f...@basic-deadline.html > > * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-flow@rcs0: &g
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915: Use correct downstream caps for check Src-Ctl mode for PCON
Re-reported successfully. From: Nautiyal, Ankit K Sent: Friday, April 30, 2021 4:24 AM To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Vudum, Lakshminarayana Subject: RE: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915: Use correct downstream caps for check Src-Ctl mode for PCON Hi Lakshmi, The given possible regression is an existing issue : https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/2867 Possible regressions * igt@gem_ctx_isolation@preservation-s3@vecs0: * shard-iclb: PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10027/shard-iclb6/igt@gem_ctx_isolation@preservation...@vecs0.html> -> DMESG-WARN<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20030/shard-iclb1/igt@gem_ctx_isolation@preservation...@vecs0.html> Perhaps we need to modify the filter. Regards, Ankit From: Patchwork mailto:patchw...@emeril.freedesktop.org>> Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2021 10:27 PM To: Nautiyal, Ankit K mailto:ankit.k.nauti...@intel.com>> Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org<mailto:intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org> Subject: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915: Use correct downstream caps for check Src-Ctl mode for PCON Patch Details Series: drm/i915: Use correct downstream caps for check Src-Ctl mode for PCON URL: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/89639/ State: failure Details: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20030/index.html CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_10027_full -> Patchwork_20030_full Summary FAILURE Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_20030_full absolutely need to be verified manually. If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes introduced in Patchwork_20030_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_20030_full: IGT changes Possible regressions * igt@gem_ctx_isolation@preservation-s3@vecs0: * shard-iclb: PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10027/shard-iclb6/igt@gem_ctx_isolation@preservation...@vecs0.html> -> DMESG-WARN<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20030/shard-iclb1/igt@gem_ctx_isolation@preservation...@vecs0.html> Known issues Here are the changes found in Patchwork_20030_full that come from known issues: IGT changes Issues hit * igt@gem_create@create-clear: * shard-glk: PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10027/shard-glk8/igt@gem_cre...@create-clear.html> -> FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20030/shard-glk7/igt@gem_cre...@create-clear.html> ([i915#1888] / [i915#3160]) * igt@gem_ctx_persistence@legacy-engines-hostile@blt: * shard-tglb: PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10027/shard-tglb2/igt@gem_ctx_persistence@legacy-engines-host...@blt.html> -> FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20030/shard-tglb6/igt@gem_ctx_persistence@legacy-engines-host...@blt.html> ([i915#2410]) * shard-kbl: PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10027/shard-kbl4/igt@gem_ctx_persistence@legacy-engines-host...@blt.html> -> FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20030/shard-kbl3/igt@gem_ctx_persistence@legacy-engines-host...@blt.html> ([i915#2410]) * igt@gem_ctx_persistence@legacy-engines-queued: * shard-snb: NOTRUN -> SKIP<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20030/shard-snb6/igt@gem_ctx_persiste...@legacy-engines-queued.html> (fdo#109271<https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109271> / [i915#1099]) +1 similar issue * igt@gem_ctx_ringsize@active@bcs0: * shard-skl: NOTRUN -> INCOMPLETE<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20030/shard-skl10/igt@gem_ctx_ringsize@act...@bcs0.html> ([i915#3316]) * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-deadline: * shard-glk: PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10027/shard-glk2/igt@gem_exec_f...@basic-deadline.html> -> FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20030/shard-glk8/igt@gem_exec_f...@basic-deadline.html> ([i915#2846]) * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace-share@rcs0: * shard-glk: PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10027/shard-glk9/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace-sh...@rcs0.html> -> FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20030/shard-glk9/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace-sh...@rcs0.html> ([i915#2842]) * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace@vcs1: * shard-iclb: PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10027/shard-iclb4/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-p...@vcs1.html> -> FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_20030/shard-iclb2/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-p...@vcs1.html> ([i915#2842]) +2 similar issues * igt@gem_mmap_gtt@cpuset-big-co
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915/pvc: Adjust EU per SS according to HAS_ONE_EU_PER_FUSE_BIT()
I am unable to load both the failures? Is there any other way to get these failures? -Original Message- From: Roper, Matthew D Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2022 1:07 PM To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org Cc: Vudum, Lakshminarayana Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915/pvc: Adjust EU per SS according to HAS_ONE_EU_PER_FUSE_BIT() On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 07:20:48PM +, Patchwork wrote: > == Series Details == > > Series: drm/i915/pvc: Adjust EU per SS according to HAS_ONE_EU_PER_FUSE_BIT() > URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/105010/ > State : failure > > == Summary == > > CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11753_full -> Patchwork_105010v1_full > > > Summary > --- > > **FAILURE** > > Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_105010v1_full absolutely need > to be > verified manually. > > If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes > introduced in Patchwork_105010v1_full, please notify your bug team to allow > them > to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI. > > > > Participating hosts (13 -> 13) > -- > > No changes in participating hosts > > Possible new issues > --- > > Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in > Patchwork_105010v1_full: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Possible regressions > > * igt@i915_module_load@reload-with-fault-injection: > - shard-snb: [PASS][1] -> [DMESG-WARN][2] >[1]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11753/shard-snb5/igt@i915_module_l...@reload-with-fault-injection.html >[2]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105010v1/shard-snb5/igt@i915_module_l...@reload-with-fault-injection.html > > * igt@syncobj_basic@bad-create-flags: > - shard-skl: NOTRUN -> [INCOMPLETE][3] >[3]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105010v1/shard-skl3/igt@syncobj_ba...@bad-create-flags.html The failure logs for the two hits above don't seem to have been uploaded to the server so I can't see exactly what went wrong. However this patch is modifying xehp_sseu_info_init() which only gets executed on Xe_HP-based platforms, so it would not change the behavior of SNB or SKL. Matt > > > Known issues > > > Here are the changes found in Patchwork_105010v1_full that come from known > issues: > > ### CI changes ### > > Issues hit > > * boot: > - shard-apl: ([PASS][4], [PASS][5], [PASS][6], [PASS][7], > [PASS][8], [PASS][9], [PASS][10], [PASS][11], [PASS][12], [PASS][13], > [PASS][14], [PASS][15], [PASS][16], [PASS][17], [PASS][18], [PASS][19], > [PASS][20], [PASS][21], [PASS][22], [PASS][23], [PASS][24], [PASS][25], > [PASS][26], [PASS][27], [PASS][28]) -> ([PASS][29], [PASS][30], [FAIL][31], > [PASS][32], [PASS][33], [PASS][34], [PASS][35], [PASS][36], [PASS][37], > [PASS][38], [PASS][39], [PASS][40], [PASS][41], [PASS][42], [PASS][43], > [PASS][44], [PASS][45], [PASS][46], [PASS][47], [PASS][48], [PASS][49], > [PASS][50], [PASS][51], [PASS][52], [PASS][53]) ([i915#4386]) >[4]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11753/shard-apl1/boot.html >[5]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11753/shard-apl1/boot.html >[6]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11753/shard-apl1/boot.html >[7]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11753/shard-apl1/boot.html >[8]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11753/shard-apl2/boot.html >[9]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11753/shard-apl2/boot.html >[10]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11753/shard-apl2/boot.html >[11]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11753/shard-apl2/boot.html >[12]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11753/shard-apl3/boot.html >[13]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11753/shard-apl3/boot.html >[14]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11753/shard-apl3/boot.html >[15]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11753/shard-apl4/boot.html >[16]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11753/shard-apl4/boot.html >[17]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11753/shard-apl4/boot.html >[18]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11753/shard-apl6/boot.html >[19]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11753/shard-apl6/boot.html
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915/pvc: Adjust EU per SS according to HAS_ONE_EU_PER_FUSE_BIT()
Comments below -Original Message- From: Roper, Matthew D Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2022 2:17 PM To: Vudum, Lakshminarayana Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915/pvc: Adjust EU per SS according to HAS_ONE_EU_PER_FUSE_BIT() Looks like the logs links finally work (there was probably a big backlog to upload them after the gitlab downtime). The module_reload log shows and ext4 filesystem panic (not graphics-related). The syncobj_basic failure is an unexpected incomplete; no graphics errors in the log that I can see, although logs of periodic non-graphics warnings from xhci_hcd. Matt On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 01:21:49PM -0700, Vudum, Lakshminarayana wrote: > I am unable to load both the failures? Is there any other way to get these > failures? > > -Original Message- > From: Roper, Matthew D > Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2022 1:07 PM > To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > Cc: Vudum, Lakshminarayana > Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915/pvc: Adjust EU per SS > according to HAS_ONE_EU_PER_FUSE_BIT() > > On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 07:20:48PM +, Patchwork wrote: > > == Series Details == > > > > Series: drm/i915/pvc: Adjust EU per SS according to > > HAS_ONE_EU_PER_FUSE_BIT() > > URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/105010/ > > State : failure > > > > == Summary == > > > > CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11753_full -> Patchwork_105010v1_full > > > > > > Summary > > --- > > > > **FAILURE** > > > > Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_105010v1_full absolutely > > need to be > > verified manually. > > > > If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes > > introduced in Patchwork_105010v1_full, please notify your bug team to > > allow them > > to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in > > CI. > > > > > > > > Participating hosts (13 -> 13) > > -- > > > > No changes in participating hosts > > > > Possible new issues > > --- > > > > Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in > > Patchwork_105010v1_full: > > > > ### IGT changes ### > > > > Possible regressions > > > > * igt@i915_module_load@reload-with-fault-injection: > > - shard-snb: [PASS][1] -> [DMESG-WARN][2] > >[1]: > > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11753/shard-snb5/igt@i915_module_l...@reload-with-fault-injection.html > >[2]: > > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105010v1/shard-snb5/igt@i915_module_l...@reload-with-fault-injection.html > > Lakshmi: This failure is same as https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/6201 > > * igt@syncobj_basic@bad-create-flags: > > - shard-skl: NOTRUN -> [INCOMPLETE][3] > >[3]: > > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105010v1/shard-skl3/igt@syncobj_ba...@bad-create-flags.html > Lakshmi: We have a bug for similar signature https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/2295 ' This test didn't produce any output. The machine probably rebooted ungracefully.' > The failure logs for the two hits above don't seem to have been uploaded > to the server so I can't see exactly what went wrong. However this > patch is modifying xehp_sseu_info_init() which only gets executed on > Xe_HP-based platforms, so it would not change the behavior of SNB or > SKL. > > > Matt > > > > > > > Known issues > > > > > > Here are the changes found in Patchwork_105010v1_full that come from > > known issues: > > > > ### CI changes ### > > > > Issues hit > > > > * boot: > > - shard-apl: ([PASS][4], [PASS][5], [PASS][6], [PASS][7], > > [PASS][8], [PASS][9], [PASS][10], [PASS][11], [PASS][12], [PASS][13], > > [PASS][14], [PASS][15], [PASS][16], [PASS][17], [PASS][18], [PASS][19], > > [PASS][20], [PASS][21], [PASS][22], [PASS][23], [PASS][24], [PASS][25], > > [PASS][26], [PASS][27], [PASS][28]) -> ([PASS][29], [PASS][30], [FAIL][31], > > [PASS][32], [PASS][33], [PASS][34], [PASS][35], [PASS][36], [PASS][37], > > [PASS][38], [PASS][39], [PASS][40], [PASS][41], [PASS][42], [PASS][43], > > [PASS][44], [PASS][45], [PASS][46], [PASS][47], [PASS][48], [PASS][49], > > [PASS][50], [PASS][51], [PASS][52], [PASS][53]) ([i915#4386]) > >[4]: > &
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for i915: Extract, polish, and document multicast handling
Yes, I see we don't have an issue. So I have created https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/6246 igt@i915_module_load@load - dmesg-warn - drm_WARN_ON(lpt_iclkip_freq(&p) != clock), WARNING: .* at drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_pch_refclk.c:\d+ lpt_program_iclkip Thanks, Lakshmi. -Original Message- From: Roper, Matthew D Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2022 2:05 PM To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org Cc: Vudum, Lakshminarayana ; Syrjala, Ville Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for i915: Extract, polish, and document multicast handling On Wed, Jun 15, 2022 at 01:03:06AM +, Patchwork wrote: > == Series Details == > > Series: i915: Extract, polish, and document multicast handling > URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/105134/ > State : failure > > == Summary == > > CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11758 -> Patchwork_105134v1 > > > Summary > --- > > **FAILURE** > > Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_105134v1 absolutely need to be > verified manually. > > If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes > introduced in Patchwork_105134v1, please notify your bug team to allow them > to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI. > > External URL: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105134v1/index.html > > Participating hosts (43 -> 43) > -- > > Additional (2): fi-hsw-4770 bat-dg2-9 > Missing(2): bat-atsm-1 fi-bdw-samus > > Possible new issues > --- > > Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in > Patchwork_105134v1: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Possible regressions > > * igt@i915_module_load@load: > - fi-hsw-4770:NOTRUN -> [DMESG-WARN][1] >[1]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105134v1/fi-hsw-477 > 0/igt@i915_module_l...@load.html <4> [25.955765] i915 :00:02.0: drm_WARN_ON(lpt_iclkip_freq(&p) != clock) <4> [25.955785] WARNING: CPU: 3 PID: 99 at drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_pch_refclk.c:182 lpt_program_iclkip+0x268/0x2f0 [i915] This display warning is unrelated to GT multicast, so not caused by this series. I don't see any similar gitlab issues that match this, but the warning itself only landed in i915 yesterday in this series: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/103491/ so it's possible this is a known preexisting problem that just has a new warning signature now and needs a new filter. +Cc Ville as the author of that series. Matt > > > Known issues > > > Here are the changes found in Patchwork_105134v1 that come from known > issues: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Issues hit > > * igt@i915_selftest@live@gem: > - fi-blb-e6850: NOTRUN -> [DMESG-FAIL][2] ([i915#4528]) >[2]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105134v1/fi-blb-e6850/igt@i915_selftest@l...@gem.html > - fi-pnv-d510:NOTRUN -> [DMESG-FAIL][3] ([i915#4528]) >[3]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105134v1/fi-pnv-d51 > 0/igt@i915_selftest@l...@gem.html > > * igt@i915_selftest@live@hangcheck: > - bat-dg1-6: [PASS][4] -> [DMESG-FAIL][5] ([i915#4494] / > [i915#4957]) >[4]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11758/bat-dg1-6/igt@i915_selftest@l...@hangcheck.html >[5]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105134v1/bat-dg1-6/ > igt@i915_selftest@l...@hangcheck.html > > * igt@i915_suspend@basic-s2idle-without-i915: > - bat-dg1-5: NOTRUN -> [INCOMPLETE][6] ([i915#6011]) >[6]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105134v1/bat-dg1-5/ > igt@i915_susp...@basic-s2idle-without-i915.html > > * igt@kms_chamelium@common-hpd-after-suspend: > - fi-bsw-n3050: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][7] ([fdo#109271] / [fdo#111827]) >[7]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105134v1/fi-bsw-n30 > 50/igt@kms_chamel...@common-hpd-after-suspend.html > > * igt@kms_pipe_crc_basic@suspend-read-crc-pipe-a: > - fi-bsw-n3050: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][8] ([fdo#109271]) >[8]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105134v1/fi-bsw-n30 > 50/igt@kms_pipe_crc_ba...@suspend-read-crc-pipe-a.html > > * igt@runner@aborted: > - fi-hsw-4770:NOTRUN -> [FAIL][9] ([i915#4312] / [i915#5594]) >[9]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105134v1/fi-hsw-477 > 0/igt@run...@aborted.html > > > Possible fixes #
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for i915: Extract, polish, and document multicast handling
We have a bug for a similar test timeout on KBL
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/6048
igt@kms_cursor_legacy@pipe-b-torture-move - incomplete - Received signal
SIGQUIT. Per-test timeout exceeded. Killing the current test with SIGQUIT.
Thanks,
Lakshmi.
-Original Message-
From: Roper, Matthew D
Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2022 9:34 PM
To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: Vudum, Lakshminarayana
Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for i915: Extract, polish, and document
multicast handling
On Thu, Jun 16, 2022 at 03:11:40AM +, Patchwork wrote:
> == Series Details ==
>
> Series: i915: Extract, polish, and document multicast handling
> URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/105134/
> State : failure
>
> == Summary ==
>
> CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11758_full -> Patchwork_105134v1_full
>
>
> Summary
> ---
>
> **FAILURE**
>
> Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_105134v1_full absolutely need
> to be
> verified manually.
>
> If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
> introduced in Patchwork_105134v1_full, please notify your bug team to allow
> them
> to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI.
>
>
>
> Participating hosts (13 -> 12)
> --
>
> Missing(1): shard-dg1
>
> Possible new issues
> ---
>
> Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in
> Patchwork_105134v1_full:
>
> ### IGT changes ###
>
> Possible regressions
>
> * igt@kms_cursor_legacy@pipe-c-torture-bo:
> - shard-skl: [PASS][1] -> [INCOMPLETE][2]
>[1]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11758/shard-skl2/igt@kms_cursor_leg...@pipe-c-torture-bo.html
>[2]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105134v1/shard-skl4
> /igt@kms_cursor_leg...@pipe-c-torture-bo.html
Appears to be a deadlock:
<3> [923.922958] INFO: task kms_cursor_lega:1361 blocked for more than 61
seconds.
<3> [923.923073] Tainted: G U W
5.19.0-rc2-Patchwork_105134v1-ga2644b16f1f0+ #1
<3> [923.923104] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables
this message.
This display test wouldn't be affected by the changes to multicast registers in
this series, so it seems unrelated.
I don't see any matching issue signatures in gitlab, although there are a
couple incompletes filed against similar tests due to timeout that might have a
related root cause (e.g., #6216).
Matt
>
>
> Suppressed
>
> The following results come from untrusted machines, tests, or statuses.
> They do not affect the overall result.
>
> * {igt@kms_plane_lowres@tiling-y@pipe-a-edp-1}:
> - {shard-rkl}:NOTRUN -> [SKIP][3] +3 similar issues
>[3]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105134v1/shard-rkl-
> 6/igt@kms_plane_lowres@tilin...@pipe-a-edp-1.html
>
>
> Known issues
>
>
> Here are the changes found in Patchwork_105134v1_full that come from known
> issues:
>
> ### IGT changes ###
>
> Issues hit
>
> * igt@gem_ctx_persistence@smoketest:
> - shard-apl: [PASS][4] -> [FAIL][5] ([i915#5099])
>[4]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11758/shard-apl7/igt@gem_ctx_persiste...@smoketest.html
>[5]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105134v1/shard-apl1
> /igt@gem_ctx_persiste...@smoketest.html
>
> * igt@gem_eio@unwedge-stress:
> - shard-iclb: [PASS][6] -> [TIMEOUT][7] ([i915#3070])
>[6]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11758/shard-iclb6/igt@gem_...@unwedge-stress.html
>[7]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105134v1/shard-iclb
> 6/igt@gem_...@unwedge-stress.html
>
> * igt@gem_exec_balancer@parallel-keep-submit-fence:
> - shard-iclb: [PASS][8] -> [SKIP][9] ([i915#4525]) +2 similar
> issues
>[8]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11758/shard-iclb2/igt@gem_exec_balan...@parallel-keep-submit-fence.html
>[9]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105134v1/shard-iclb
> 8/igt@gem_exec_balan...@parallel-keep-submit-fence.html
>
> * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-solo@rcs0:
> - shard-apl: [PASS][10] -> [FAIL][11] ([i915#2842])
>[10]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11758/shard-apl3/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-s...@rcs0.html
>[11]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105134v1/sh
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/dp/mst: Read the extended DPCD capabilities during system resume
Failure is related to https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/3063
Lakshmi.
-Original Message-
From: Deak, Imre
Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2022 11:58 AM
To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Nikula, Jani ;
Lyude Paul ; Vudum, Lakshminarayana
Cc: dri-de...@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/dp/mst: Read the extended DPCD
capabilities during system resume
On Wed, Jun 15, 2022 at 04:25:34AM +, Patchwork wrote:
> == Series Details ==
>
> Series: drm/dp/mst: Read the extended DPCD capabilities during system resume
> URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/105102/
> State : failure
Thanks for the reviews, pushed the patch to drm-misc-next also adding
Cc: stable.
The failure is unrelated, see below.
> == Summary ==
>
> CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11756_full -> Patchwork_105102v1_full
>
>
> Summary
> ---
>
> **FAILURE**
>
> Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_105102v1_full absolutely need
> to be
> verified manually.
>
> If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
> introduced in Patchwork_105102v1_full, please notify your bug team to allow
> them
> to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI.
>
>
>
> Participating hosts (13 -> 13)
> --
>
> No changes in participating hosts
>
> Possible new issues
> ---
>
> Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in
> Patchwork_105102v1_full:
>
> ### IGT changes ###
>
> Possible regressions
>
> * igt@gem_eio@reset-stress:
> - shard-snb: [PASS][1] -> [TIMEOUT][2]
>[1]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11756/shard-snb7/igt@gem_...@reset-stress.html
>[2]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105102v1/shard-snb2/igt@gem_...@reset-stress.html
<7> [109.948420] heartbeat vcs0 heartbeat {seqno:5:11771, prio:-2147483648} not
ticking
SNB doesn't support MST, so it's some unrelated issue.
> New tests
> -
>
> New tests have been introduced between CI_DRM_11756_full and
> Patchwork_105102v1_full:
>
> ### New IGT tests (5) ###
>
> * igt@kms_atomic_interruptible@legacy-setmode@hdmi-a-3-pipe-a:
> - Statuses : 1 pass(s)
> - Exec time: [6.14] s
>
> * igt@kms_plane_lowres@tiling-none@pipe-a-hdmi-a-3:
> - Statuses : 1 pass(s)
> - Exec time: [8.02] s
>
> * igt@kms_plane_lowres@tiling-none@pipe-b-hdmi-a-3:
> - Statuses : 1 pass(s)
> - Exec time: [7.91] s
>
> * igt@kms_plane_lowres@tiling-none@pipe-c-hdmi-a-3:
> - Statuses : 1 pass(s)
> - Exec time: [7.93] s
>
> * igt@kms_plane_lowres@tiling-none@pipe-d-hdmi-a-3:
> - Statuses : 1 pass(s)
> - Exec time: [7.94] s
>
>
>
> Known issues
>
>
> Here are the changes found in Patchwork_105102v1_full that come from known
> issues:
>
> ### IGT changes ###
>
> Issues hit
>
> * igt@gem_eio@in-flight-contexts-1us:
> - shard-apl: [PASS][3] -> [TIMEOUT][4] ([i915#3063])
>[3]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11756/shard-apl2/igt@gem_...@in-flight-contexts-1us.html
>[4]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105102v1/shard-apl2/igt@gem_...@in-flight-contexts-1us.html
>
> * igt@gem_exec_balancer@parallel-keep-in-fence:
> - shard-iclb: [PASS][5] -> [SKIP][6] ([i915#4525]) +2 similar
> issues
>[5]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11756/shard-iclb2/igt@gem_exec_balan...@parallel-keep-in-fence.html
>[6]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105102v1/shard-iclb5/igt@gem_exec_balan...@parallel-keep-in-fence.html
>
> * igt@gem_exec_capture@pi@vcs0:
> - shard-iclb: [PASS][7] -> [INCOMPLETE][8] ([i915#3371])
>[7]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11756/shard-iclb7/igt@gem_exec_capture@p...@vcs0.html
>[8]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105102v1/shard-iclb1/igt@gem_exec_capture@p...@vcs0.html
>
> * igt@gem_exec_endless@dispatch@bcs0:
> - shard-tglb: [PASS][9] -> [INCOMPLETE][10] ([i915#3778])
>[9]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11756/shard-tglb2/igt@gem_exec_endless@dispa...@bcs0.html
>[10]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105102v1/shard-tglb1/igt@gem_exec_endless@dispa...@bcs0.html
>
> * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-solo@rcs0:
> - shard-kbl: NOTRUN -> [FAIL][11] ([i915#
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for series starting with [1/3] drm/i915/display: Add smem fallback allocation for dpt (rev5)
Issue is related to #5726. Updated the filters. -Original Message- From: Juha-Pekka Heikkila Sent: Friday, June 17, 2022 4:36 AM To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Vudum, Lakshminarayana Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for series starting with [1/3] drm/i915/display: Add smem fallback allocation for dpt (rev5) Hi Lakshmi, here would be another false positive from ci. My changes are not affecting this error with busyness on skl with igt@kms_flip@busy-flip@a-edp1 /Juha-Pekka On 17.6.2022 13.19, Patchwork wrote: > *Patch Details* > *Series:* series starting with [1/3] drm/i915/display: Add smem fallback > allocation for dpt (rev5) > *URL:*https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/104983/ > <https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/104983/> > *State:* failure > *Details:* > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_104983v5/index.html > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_104983v5/index.htm > l> > > > CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11772_full -> > Patchwork_104983v5_full > > > Summary > > *FAILURE* > > Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_104983v5_full absolutely > need to be verified manually. > > If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes > introduced in Patchwork_104983v5_full, please notify your bug team to > allow them to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false > positives in CI. > > > Participating hosts (10 -> 10) > > No changes in participating hosts > > > Possible new issues > > Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in > Patchwork_104983v5_full: > > > IGT changes > > > Possible regressions > > * igt@kms_flip@busy-flip@a-edp1: > o shard-skl: PASS > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11772/shard-skl2/igt@kms_flip@busy-f...@a-edp1.html> > -> FAIL > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_104983v5/shard-skl > 4/igt@kms_flip@busy-f...@a-edp1.html> > > > Known issues > > Here are the changes found in Patchwork_104983v5_full that come from > known issues: > > > CI changes > > > Issues hit > > * boot: > o shard-glk: (PASS > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11772/shard-glk9/boot.html>, > PASS > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11772/shard-glk9/boot.html>, > PASS > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11772/shard-glk8/boot.html>, > PASS > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11772/shard-glk8/boot.html>, > PASS > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11772/shard-glk8/boot.html>, > PASS > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11772/shard-glk7/boot.html>, > PASS > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11772/shard-glk7/boot.html>, > PASS > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11772/shard-glk6/boot.html>, > PASS > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11772/shard-glk6/boot.html>, > PASS > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11772/shard-glk6/boot.html>, > PASS > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11772/shard-glk5/boot.html>, > PASS > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11772/shard-glk5/boot.html>, > PASS > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11772/shard-glk5/boot.html>, > PASS > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11772/shard-glk4/boot.html>, > PASS > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11772/shard-glk4/boot.html>, > PASS > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11772/shard-glk4/boot.html>, > PASS > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11772/shard-glk3/boot.html>, > PASS > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11772/shard-glk3/boot.html>, > PASS > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11772/shard-glk3/boot.html>, > PASS > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11772/shard-glk2/boot.html>, > PASS > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11772/shard-glk2/boo
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915: tweak the ordering in cpu_write_needs_clflush
Issue is related to https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/2346
igt@kms_cursor_legacy@flip-vs-cursor - fail - Failed assertion:
kmstest_get_vblank(display->drm_fd, pipe, 0) == vblank_start|Failed assertion:
kmstest_get_vblank(display->drm_fd, pipe, 0) <= vblank_start + 1
Thanks,
Lakshmi.
-Original Message-
From: Matthew Auld
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022 5:04 AM
To: Intel Graphics Development ; Vudum,
Lakshminarayana
Cc: Auld, Matthew
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915: tweak the ordering
in cpu_write_needs_clflush
On Mon, 27 Jun 2022 at 12:49, Patchwork
wrote:
>
> Patch Details
> Series:drm/i915: tweak the ordering in cpu_write_needs_clflush
> URL:https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/105503/
> State:failure
> Details:https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105503v1/in
> dex.html
>
> CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11795_full -> Patchwork_105503v1_full
>
> Summary
>
> FAILURE
>
> Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_105503v1_full absolutely
> need to be verified manually.
>
> If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
> introduced in Patchwork_105503v1_full, please notify your bug team to
> allow them to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false
> positives in CI.
>
> Participating hosts (13 -> 13)
>
> No changes in participating hosts
>
> Possible new issues
>
> Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in
> Patchwork_105503v1_full:
>
> IGT changes
>
> Possible regressions
>
> igt@kms_cursor_legacy@flip-vs-cursor@atomic-transitions-varying-size:
>
> shard-skl: NOTRUN -> FAIL +1 similar issue
For sure unrelated. Patch only impacts discrete.
>
> Suppressed
>
> The following results come from untrusted machines, tests, or statuses.
> They do not affect the overall result.
>
> {igt@kms_cursor_crc@cursor-offscreen@pipe-d-hdmi-a-1-32x10}:
>
> {shard-dg1}: NOTRUN -> SKIP +15 similar issues
>
> igt@kms_cursor_crc@cursor-rapid-movement@pipe-b-edp-1-32x32:
>
> {shard-rkl}: NOTRUN -> SKIP +3 similar issues
>
> New tests
>
> New tests have been introduced between CI_DRM_11795_full and
> Patchwork_105503v1_full:
>
> New IGT tests (7)
>
> igt@kms_cursor_edge_walk@right-edge@pipe-a-hdmi-a-3-128x128:
>
> Statuses : 1 pass(s)
> Exec time: [3.23] s
>
> igt@kms_cursor_edge_walk@right-edge@pipe-a-hdmi-a-3-256x256:
>
> Statuses : 1 pass(s)
> Exec time: [3.23] s
>
> igt@kms_cursor_edge_walk@right-edge@pipe-a-hdmi-a-3-64x64:
>
> Statuses : 1 pass(s)
> Exec time: [3.30] s
>
> igt@kms_pipe_crc_basic@read-crc-frame-sequence@pipe-a-hdmi-a-3:
>
> Statuses : 1 pass(s)
> Exec time: [0.56] s
>
> igt@kms_pipe_crc_basic@read-crc-frame-sequence@pipe-b-hdmi-a-3:
>
> Statuses : 1 pass(s)
> Exec time: [0.46] s
>
> igt@kms_pipe_crc_basic@read-crc-frame-sequence@pipe-c-hdmi-a-3:
>
> Statuses : 1 pass(s)
> Exec time: [0.46] s
>
> igt@kms_pipe_crc_basic@read-crc-frame-sequence@pipe-d-hdmi-a-3:
>
> Statuses : 1 pass(s)
> Exec time: [0.46] s
>
> Known issues
>
> Here are the changes found in Patchwork_105503v1_full that come from known
> issues:
>
> IGT changes
>
> Issues hit
>
> igt@gem_ctx_persistence@hang:
>
> shard-skl: NOTRUN -> SKIP (fdo#109271) +230 similar issues
>
> igt@gem_exec_balancer@parallel-balancer:
>
> shard-iclb: PASS -> SKIP (i915#4525)
>
> igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-share@rcs0:
>
> shard-glk: PASS -> FAIL (i915#2842)
>
> igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none@vcs1:
>
> shard-kbl: PASS -> FAIL (i915#2842) +2 similar issues
>
> igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace-solo@rcs0:
>
> shard-tglb: PASS -> FAIL (i915#2842)
>
> igt@gem_exec_suspend@basic-s3@smem:
>
> shard-skl: PASS -> INCOMPLETE (i915#4939)
>
> igt@gem_lmem_swapping@heavy-verify-multi:
>
> shard-apl: NOTRUN -> SKIP (fdo#109271 / i915#4613)
>
> shard-tglb: NOTRUN -> SKIP (i915#4613)
>
> igt@gem_lmem_swapping@smem-oom:
>
> shard-skl: NOTRUN -> SKIP (fdo#109271 / i915#4613) +2 similar issues
>
> igt@gem_lmem_swapping@verify-random:
>
> shard-kbl: NOTRUN -> SKIP (fdo#109271 / i915#4613)
>
> igt@gem_pread@exhaustion:
>
> shard-kbl: NOTRUN -> WARN (i915#2658)
>
> igt@gem_pxp@regular-baseline-src-copy-readible:
>
> shard-tglb: NOTRUN -> SKIP (i915#4270)
>
> igt@gem_softpin@evict-snoop-interruptible:
>
> shard-iclb: NOTRUN -> SKIP (fdo#109312)
>
> igt@gen7_exec_parse@chained-batch:
>
> shard-tglb: NOTRUN -> SKIP (fdo#109289)
>
> igt@gen9_exec_parse@allowed-all:
>
> shard-glk: PASS -> DMESG-WARN (i915#5566 / i91
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for series starting with [CI,1/2] iosys-map: Add per-word read
Issue is related to https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/6310
All tests - general protection fault, probably for non-canonical address
0x6b6b6b6b6b6b7c6b
Since we have clean BAT results from Rev 2, I haven’t re-reported.
Lakshmi.
From: Lucas De Marchi
Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2022 5:09 PM
To: Intel Graphics
Cc: De Marchi, Lucas ; Vudum, Lakshminarayana
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for series starting with [CI,1/2]
iosys-map: Add per-word read
+Lakshmi
Can't see how these would be related. Searching recent failure I found this
very similar one:
https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11814/shard-glk7/pstore24-1656384153_Oops_1.txt
Lucas De Marchi
On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 3:49 PM Patchwork
mailto:patchw...@emeril.freedesktop.org>>
wrote:
Patch Details
Series:
series starting with [CI,1/2] iosys-map: Add per-word read
URL:
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/105746/
State:
failure
Details:
https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105746v1/index.html
CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11820 -> Patchwork_105746v1
Summary
FAILURE
Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_105746v1 absolutely need to be
verified manually.
If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
introduced in Patchwork_105746v1, please notify your bug team to allow them
to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI.
External URL:
https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105746v1/index.html
Participating hosts (38 -> 37)
Missing (1): bat-adlp-4
Possible new issues
Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in
Patchwork_105746v1:
IGT changes
Possible regressions
* igt@gem_exec_parallel@engines@fds:
* fi-bsw-kefka:
PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11820/fi-bsw-kefka/igt@gem_exec_parallel@engi...@fds.html>
->
INCOMPLETE<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105746v1/fi-bsw-kefka/igt@gem_exec_parallel@engi...@fds.html>
* fi-cfl-8109u:
PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11820/fi-cfl-8109u/igt@gem_exec_parallel@engi...@fds.html>
->
INCOMPLETE<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105746v1/fi-cfl-8109u/igt@gem_exec_parallel@engi...@fds.html>
Suppressed
The following results come from untrusted machines, tests, or statuses.
They do not affect the overall result.
* igt@i915_selftest@live@gt_heartbeat:
* {bat-adln-1}: NOTRUN ->
DMESG-FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105746v1/bat-adln-1/igt@i915_selftest@live@gt_heartbeat.html>
Known issues
Here are the changes found in Patchwork_105746v1 that come from known issues:
IGT changes
Issues hit
* igt@i915_selftest@live@hangcheck:
* fi-hsw-g3258:
PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11820/fi-hsw-g3258/igt@i915_selftest@l...@hangcheck.html>
->
INCOMPLETE<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105746v1/fi-hsw-g3258/igt@i915_selftest@l...@hangcheck.html>
(i915#4785<https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/4785>)
* igt@i915_selftest@live@late_gt_pm:
* fi-bsw-nick:
PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11820/fi-bsw-nick/igt@i915_selftest@live@late_gt_pm.html>
->
DMESG-FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105746v1/fi-bsw-nick/igt@i915_selftest@live@late_gt_pm.html>
(i915#3428<https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/3428>)
* igt@kms_chamelium@common-hpd-after-suspend:
* fi-pnv-d510: NOTRUN ->
SKIP<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105746v1/fi-pnv-d510/igt@kms_chamel...@common-hpd-after-suspend.html>
(fdo#109271<https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109271>)
* igt@runner@aborted:
* fi-cfl-8109u: NOTRUN ->
FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105746v1/fi-cfl-8109u/igt@run...@aborted.html>
(i915#4312<https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/4312>)
* fi-bsw-nick: NOTRUN ->
FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105746v1/fi-bsw-nick/igt@run...@aborted.html>
(fdo#109271<https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109271> /
i915#3428<https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/3428> /
i915#4312<https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/4312>)
* fi-hsw-g3258: NOTRUN ->
FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105746v1/fi-hsw-g3258/igt@run...@aborted.html>
(fdo#109271<https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109271> /
i915#4312<https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/4312> /
i915#6246<https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/6246>)
* fi-bsw-kefka: NOTRUN ->
FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105746v1/fi-bsw-kefka/igt@run...@aborted.html>
(i915#4312<
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for series starting with [CI,1/2] iosys-map: Add per-word read (rev2)
Created new issue https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/6328 igt@kms_cursor_legacy@flip-vs-cursor.* - fail - Timed out: Stuck page flip Lakshmi. -Original Message- From: De Marchi, Lucas Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2022 5:23 PM To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org Cc: Vudum, Lakshminarayana Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for series starting with [CI,1/2] iosys-map: Add per-word read (rev2) On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 09:20:46PM +, Patchwork wrote: >== Series Details == > >Series: series starting with [CI,1/2] iosys-map: Add per-word read (rev2) >URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/105746/ >State : failure > >== Summary == > >CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11823_full -> Patchwork_105746v2_full > > >Summary >--- > > **FAILURE** > > Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_105746v2_full absolutely need > to be > verified manually. > > If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes > introduced in Patchwork_105746v2_full, please notify your bug team to allow > them > to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI. > > > >Participating hosts (13 -> 13) >-- > > No changes in participating hosts > >Possible new issues >--- > > Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in > Patchwork_105746v2_full: > >### IGT changes ### > > Possible regressions > > * igt@kms_cursor_legacy@cursor-vs-flip@atomic-transitions-varying-size: >- shard-iclb: [PASS][1] -> [FAIL][2] > [1]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11823/shard-iclb1/igt@kms_cursor_legacy@cursor-vs-f...@atomic-transitions-varying-size.html > [2]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105746v2/shard-iclb7/igt@kms_cursor_legacy@cursor-vs-f...@atomic-transitions-varying-size.html > > * igt@kms_cursor_legacy@flip-vs-cursor@atomic-transitions: >- shard-tglb: [PASS][3] -> [FAIL][4] +1 similar issue > [3]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11823/shard-tglb5/igt@kms_cursor_legacy@flip-vs-cur...@atomic-transitions.html > [4]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105746v2/shard-tglb1/igt@kms_cursor_legacy@flip-vs-cur...@atomic-transitions.html none of these are related with the iosys-map changes. Outside of guc, iosys_map is currently only used in i915 by i915_gem_prime_export which is not exercised by these display tests. Lucas De Marchi > > > >### Piglit changes ### > > Possible regressions > > * spec@!opengl 1.1@teximage-colors gl_rgba32f: >- pig-skl-6260u: NOTRUN -> [INCOMPLETE][5] > [5]: None > > * spec@glsl-1.10@execution@variable-indexing@vs-varying-mat2-rd: >- pig-glk-j5005: NOTRUN -> [INCOMPLETE][6] > [6]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105746v2/pig-glk-j5005/spec@glsl-1.10@execution@variable-index...@vs-varying-mat2-rd.html > > >Known issues > > > Here are the changes found in Patchwork_105746v2_full that come from known > issues: > >### CI changes ### > > Possible fixes > > * boot: >- shard-glk: ([PASS][7], [PASS][8], [PASS][9], [PASS][10], > [PASS][11], [PASS][12], [PASS][13], [PASS][14], [PASS][15], [PASS][16], > [PASS][17], [PASS][18], [PASS][19], [PASS][20], [PASS][21], [PASS][22], > [PASS][23], [PASS][24], [PASS][25], [PASS][26], [PASS][27], [FAIL][28], > [PASS][29], [PASS][30], [PASS][31]) ([i915#4392]) -> ([PASS][32], [PASS][33], > [PASS][34], [PASS][35], [PASS][36], [PASS][37], [PASS][38], [PASS][39], > [PASS][40], [PASS][41], [PASS][42], [PASS][43], [PASS][44], [PASS][45], > [PASS][46], [PASS][47], [PASS][48], [PASS][49], [PASS][50], [PASS][51], > [PASS][52], [PASS][53], [PASS][54], [PASS][55], [PASS][56]) > [7]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11823/shard-glk5/boot.html > [8]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11823/shard-glk5/boot.html > [9]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11823/shard-glk6/boot.html > [10]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11823/shard-glk5/boot.html > [11]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11823/shard-glk6/boot.html > [12]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11823/shard-glk6/boot.html > [13]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11823/shard-glk7/boot.html > [14]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11823/shard-glk7/boot.html > [15]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11823/shard-glk3/boot.html
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for series starting with [CI,v4,01/13] drm/doc: add rfc section for small BAR uapi
Re-reported. Filed a new issue https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/6326 igt@i915_query@query-regions-garbage-items - fail - Failed assertion: info.rsvd1[j] == 0 Lakshmi. -Original Message- From: Auld, Matthew Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2022 5:39 AM To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Vudum, Lakshminarayana Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for series starting with [CI,v4,01/13] drm/doc: add rfc section for small BAR uapi On 30/06/2022 10:42, Patchwork wrote: > *Patch Details* > *Series:* series starting with [CI,v4,01/13] drm/doc: add rfc section > for small BAR uapi > *URL:*https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/105787/ > <https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/105787/> > *State:* failure > *Details:* > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105787v1/index.html > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105787v1/index.html> > > > CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11825_full -> Patchwork_105787v1_full > > > Summary > > *FAILURE* > > Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_105787v1_full absolutely > need to be > verified manually. > > If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes > introduced in Patchwork_105787v1_full, please notify your bug team to > allow them > to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI. > > > Participating hosts (13 -> 13) > > No changes in participating hosts > > > Possible new issues > > Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in > Patchwork_105787v1_full: > > > IGT changes > > > Possible regressions > > * > > igt@i915_query@query-regions-garbage-items: > > o > > shard-apl: PASS > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11825/shard-apl2/igt@i915_qu...@query-regions-garbage-items.html> > -> FAIL > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105787v1/shard-apl7/igt@i915_qu...@query-regions-garbage-items.html> > > o > > shard-tglb: PASS > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11825/shard-tglb2/igt@i915_qu...@query-regions-garbage-items.html> > -> FAIL > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105787v1/shard-tglb7/igt@i915_qu...@query-regions-garbage-items.html> > > o > > shard-glk: PASS > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11825/shard-glk3/igt@i915_qu...@query-regions-garbage-items.html> > -> FAIL > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105787v1/shard-glk8/igt@i915_qu...@query-regions-garbage-items.html> > > o > > shard-iclb: PASS > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11825/shard-iclb4/igt@i915_qu...@query-regions-garbage-items.html> > -> FAIL > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105787v1/shard-iclb2/igt@i915_qu...@query-regions-garbage-items.html> > > o > > shard-kbl: PASS > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11825/shard-kbl1/igt@i915_qu...@query-regions-garbage-items.html> > -> FAIL > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105787v1/shard-kbl6/igt@i915_qu...@query-regions-garbage-items.html> > > o > > shard-snb: PASS > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11825/shard-snb5/igt@i915_qu...@query-regions-garbage-items.html> > -> FAIL > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105787v1/shard-snb5/igt@i915_qu...@query-regions-garbage-items.html> > > o > > shard-skl: PASS > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11825/shard-skl1/igt@i915_qu...@query-regions-garbage-items.html> > -> FAIL > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105787v1/shard-skl7/igt@i915_qu...@query-regions-garbage-items.html> > > * > > igt@kms_cursor_legacy@cursor-vs-flip@atomic: > > o shard-skl: NOTRUN -> INCOMPLETE > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105787v1/shard-skl1/igt@kms_cursor_legacy@cursor-vs-f...@atomic.html> This one looks unrelated. The other failures are expected/normal until the IGT series is merged (plan is merge that first so we don't see these failures): https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/105792/ > > > Suppressed > > The following results come fro
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915/pvc: Implement w/a 16016694945
They both are known issues. Re-reported.
-Original Message-
From: Roper, Matthew D
Sent: Friday, July 1, 2022 8:44 AM
To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: Sousa, Gustavo ; Vudum, Lakshminarayana
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915/pvc: Implement w/a
16016694945
On Fri, Jul 01, 2022 at 12:52:21PM +, Patchwork wrote:
> == Series Details ==
>
> Series: drm/i915/pvc: Implement w/a 16016694945
> URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/105837/
> State : failure
>
> == Summary ==
>
> CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11835_full -> Patchwork_105837v1_full
>
>
> Summary
> ---
>
> **FAILURE**
>
> Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_105837v1_full absolutely need
> to be
> verified manually.
>
> If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
> introduced in Patchwork_105837v1_full, please notify your bug team to allow
> them
> to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI.
>
>
>
> Participating hosts (13 -> 13)
> --
>
> No changes in participating hosts
>
> Possible new issues
> ---
>
> Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in
> Patchwork_105837v1_full:
>
> ### IGT changes ###
>
> Suppressed
>
> The following results come from untrusted machines, tests, or statuses.
> They do not affect the overall result.
>
> * igt@gem_create@create-ext-cpu-access-big:
> - {shard-rkl}:NOTRUN -> [SKIP][1]
>[1]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105837v1/shard-rkl-5/igt@gem_cre...@create-ext-cpu-access-big.html
>
> * igt@i915_query@query-regions-unallocated:
> - {shard-dg1}:NOTRUN -> [SKIP][2] +2 similar issues
>[2]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105837v1/shard-dg1-16/igt@i915_qu...@query-regions-unallocated.html
These both look like new tests that were just added to exercise small
BAR support; I believe the skips were expected until the corresponding
kernel changes from Matt Auld landed (which just happened this morning,
probably after this series was tested). Not related to Gustavo's patch
here.
>
>
> ### Piglit changes ###
>
> Possible regressions
>
> * spec@arb_gpu_shader5@texturegatheroffset@vs-rgba-3-unorm-2drect-const:
> - pig-glk-j5005: NOTRUN -> [CRASH][3] +1 similar issue
>[3]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105837v1/pig-glk-j5005/spec@arb_gpu_shader5@texturegatheroff...@vs-rgba-3-unorm-2drect-const.html
>
> * spec@ext_texture_snorm@fbo-colormask-formats:
> - pig-skl-6260u: NOTRUN -> [INCOMPLETE][4]
>[4]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105837v1/pig-skl-6260u/spec@ext_texture_sn...@fbo-colormask-formats.html
The PVC workaround wouldn't have impacted execution on old gen9
platforms like GLK and SKL. Not related to Gustavo's patch.
Applied to drm-intel-gt-next. Thanks for the patch.
Matt
>
>
> Known issues
>
>
> Here are the changes found in Patchwork_105837v1_full that come from known
> issues:
>
> ### IGT changes ###
>
> Issues hit
>
> * igt@gem_ctx_persistence@hang:
> - shard-skl: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][5] ([fdo#109271]) +116 similar
> issues
>[5]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105837v1/shard-skl6/igt@gem_ctx_persiste...@hang.html
>
> * igt@gem_eio@unwedge-stress:
> - shard-tglb: [PASS][6] -> [FAIL][7] ([i915#5784])
>[6]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11835/shard-tglb7/igt@gem_...@unwedge-stress.html
>[7]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105837v1/shard-tglb5/igt@gem_...@unwedge-stress.html
>
> * igt@gem_exec_balancer@parallel-bb-first:
> - shard-iclb: [PASS][8] -> [SKIP][9] ([i915#4525]) +1 similar
> issue
>[8]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11835/shard-iclb2/igt@gem_exec_balan...@parallel-bb-first.html
>[9]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105837v1/shard-iclb3/igt@gem_exec_balan...@parallel-bb-first.html
>
> * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none@vcs0:
> - shard-apl: [PASS][10] -> [FAIL][11] ([i915#2842]) +1 similar
> issue
>[10]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11835/shard-apl8/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-n...@vcs0.html
>[11]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105837v1/shard-apl7/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-n...@vcs0.html
>
> * igt
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915/gt: Add general DSS steering iterator to intel_gt_mcr (rev2)
Filed a new issue for the mismatch.
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/6400
igt@kms_pipe_crc_basic@.* - fail - Failed assertion: !mismatch ||
igt_skip_crc_compare
Thanks,
Lakshmi.
-Original Message-
From: Roper, Matthew D
Sent: Friday, July 8, 2022 9:35 AM
To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: Vudum, Lakshminarayana
Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915/gt: Add general DSS steering
iterator to intel_gt_mcr (rev2)
On Sat, Jul 02, 2022 at 06:25:09PM +, Patchwork wrote:
> == Series Details ==
>
> Series: drm/i915/gt: Add general DSS steering iterator to intel_gt_mcr (rev2)
> URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/105883/
> State : failure
>
> == Summary ==
>
> CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11842_full -> Patchwork_105883v2_full
>
>
> Summary
> ---
>
> **FAILURE**
>
> Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_105883v2_full absolutely need
> to be
> verified manually.
>
> If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
> introduced in Patchwork_105883v2_full, please notify your bug team to allow
> them
> to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI.
>
>
>
> Participating hosts (10 -> 13)
> --
>
> Additional (3): shard-rkl shard-dg1 shard-tglu
>
> Possible new issues
> ---
>
> Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in
> Patchwork_105883v2_full:
>
> ### IGT changes ###
>
> Possible regressions
>
> *
> igt@kms_flip_scaled_crc@flip-32bpp-yftileccs-to-64bpp-yftile-downscaling@pipe-a-valid-mode:
> - shard-iclb: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][1] +3 similar issues
>[1]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105883v2/shard-iclb1/igt@kms_flip_scaled_crc@flip-32bpp-yftileccs-to-64bpp-yftile-downscal...@pipe-a-valid-mode.html
Seems to be new tests that match
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/2672 .
New tests were likely introduced by
commit 01f75333df0d27768ef987653ab49c3a1223ce3d
Author: Swati Sharma
AuthorDate: Thu Jun 30 13:15:11 2022 +0300
Commit: Juha-Pekka Heikkila
CommitDate: Fri Jul 1 12:41:09 2022 +0300
tests/i915/kms_flip_scaled_crc: Add new tests covering modifiers and
pixel-formats
>
> * igt@kms_pipe_crc_basic@nonblocking-crc-frame-sequence@pipe-b-hdmi-a-2:
> - shard-glk: [PASS][2] -> [FAIL][3]
>[2]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11842/shard-glk7/igt@kms_pipe_crc_basic@nonblocking-crc-frame-seque...@pipe-b-hdmi-a-2.html
>[3]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105883v2/shard-glk1/igt@kms_pipe_crc_basic@nonblocking-crc-frame-seque...@pipe-b-hdmi-a-2.html
CRC mismatch. Display CRCs would not be impacted by this patch which
just adds a new GT loop interface
Patch applied to drm-intel-gt-next. Thanks Matt Atwood for the review.
Matt
>
>
> Suppressed
>
> The following results come from untrusted machines, tests, or statuses.
> They do not affect the overall result.
>
> * igt@gem_exec_capture@pi@rcs0:
> - {shard-dg1}:NOTRUN -> [INCOMPLETE][4]
>[4]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105883v2/shard-dg1-15/igt@gem_exec_capture@p...@rcs0.html
>
> *
> igt@kms_flip_scaled_crc@flip-32bpp-yftile-to-64bpp-yftile-downscaling@pipe-a-valid-mode:
> - {shard-tglu}: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][5] +14 similar issues
>[5]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105883v2/shard-tglu-6/igt@kms_flip_scaled_crc@flip-32bpp-yftile-to-64bpp-yftile-downscal...@pipe-a-valid-mode.html
>
> *
> igt@kms_flip_scaled_crc@flip-64bpp-4tile-to-16bpp-4tile-upscaling@pipe-a-valid-mode:
> - {shard-dg1}:NOTRUN -> [SKIP][6] +13 similar issues
>[6]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105883v2/shard-dg1-12/igt@kms_flip_scaled_crc@flip-64bpp-4tile-to-16bpp-4tile-upscal...@pipe-a-valid-mode.html
>
> * igt@kms_flip_scaled_crc@flip-64bpp-linear-to-16bpp-linear-downscaling:
> - {shard-rkl}:NOTRUN -> [SKIP][7] +31 similar issues
>[7]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105883v2/shard-rkl-5/igt@kms_flip_scaled_...@flip-64bpp-linear-to-16bpp-linear-downscaling.html
>
> *
> {igt@kms_flip_scaled_crc@flip-64bpp-linear-to-32bpp-linear-downscaling@pipe-a-default-mode}:
> - shard-iclb: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][8] +2 similar issues
>[8]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105883v2/shard-iclb2/igt@kms_flip_scaled_crc@flip-64bpp-linear-to-32bpp-linear-downscal...@pipe-a-default-mode.ht
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for i915: Introduce Meteorlake
Issue is related to https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/6169
Few tests - incomplete - pstore logs, Kernel panic - not syncing: Software
Watchdog Timer expired, RIP: 0010:cpuidle_enter_state
Thanks,
Lakshmi.
-Original Message-
From: Roper, Matthew D
Sent: Friday, July 8, 2022 1:34 PM
To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: Sripada, Radhakrishna ; Vudum,
Lakshminarayana ; Vivi, Rodrigo
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for i915: Introduce Meteorlake
On Fri, Jul 08, 2022 at 04:38:48PM +, Patchwork wrote:
> == Series Details ==
>
> Series: i915: Introduce Meteorlake
> URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/106075/
> State : failure
>
> == Summary ==
>
> CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11859_full -> Patchwork_106075v1_full
>
>
> Summary
> ---
>
> **FAILURE**
>
> Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_106075v1_full absolutely need
> to be
> verified manually.
>
> If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
> introduced in Patchwork_106075v1_full, please notify your bug team to allow
> them
> to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI.
>
>
>
> Participating hosts (13 -> 13)
> --
>
> No changes in participating hosts
>
> Possible new issues
> ---
>
> Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in
> Patchwork_106075v1_full:
>
> ### IGT changes ###
>
> Possible regressions
>
> * igt@gem_exec_schedule@wide@vcs1:
> - shard-kbl: [PASS][1] -> [INCOMPLETE][2]
>[1]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11859/shard-kbl4/igt@gem_exec_schedule@w...@vcs1.html
>[2]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_106075v1/shard-kbl1/igt@gem_exec_schedule@w...@vcs1.html
Test actually finished executing, but then there were some NVME errors,
followed by
<2>[ 334.527621] softdog: Initiating panic
<0>[ 334.529807] Kernel panic - not syncing: Software Watchdog Timer expired
This looks like general system instability, likely not related to
graphics at all.
Series applied to drm-intel-gt-next (as suggested by Rodrigo, since this
will allow the IS_METEORLAKE definitions to be cross-pollinated across
both drm-intel branches most easily).
Thanks for the patches.
Matt
>
>
> Suppressed
>
> The following results come from untrusted machines, tests, or statuses.
> They do not affect the overall result.
>
> * igt@i915_pm_rc6_residency@rc6-idle@vcs0:
> - {shard-rkl}:NOTRUN -> [WARN][3]
>[3]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_106075v1/shard-rkl-5/igt@i915_pm_rc6_residency@rc6-i...@vcs0.html
>
> * igt@kms_cursor_legacy@cursor-vs-flip@atomic:
> - {shard-dg1}:[PASS][4] -> [FAIL][5] +4 similar issues
>[4]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11859/shard-dg1-12/igt@kms_cursor_legacy@cursor-vs-f...@atomic.html
>[5]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_106075v1/shard-dg1-15/igt@kms_cursor_legacy@cursor-vs-f...@atomic.html
>
>
> Known issues
>
>
> Here are the changes found in Patchwork_106075v1_full that come from known
> issues:
>
> ### CI changes ###
>
> Possible fixes
>
> * boot:
> - shard-skl: ([PASS][6], [PASS][7], [PASS][8], [PASS][9],
> [PASS][10], [PASS][11], [PASS][12], [PASS][13], [PASS][14], [PASS][15],
> [PASS][16], [FAIL][17], [PASS][18], [PASS][19], [PASS][20], [PASS][21],
> [PASS][22], [PASS][23], [PASS][24], [PASS][25], [PASS][26], [PASS][27],
> [PASS][28], [PASS][29], [PASS][30]) ([i915#5032]) -> ([PASS][31], [PASS][32],
> [PASS][33], [PASS][34], [PASS][35], [PASS][36], [PASS][37], [PASS][38],
> [PASS][39], [PASS][40], [PASS][41], [PASS][42], [PASS][43], [PASS][44],
> [PASS][45], [PASS][46], [PASS][47], [PASS][48], [PASS][49], [PASS][50],
> [PASS][51], [PASS][52])
>[6]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11859/shard-skl10/boot.html
>[7]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11859/shard-skl10/boot.html
>[8]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11859/shard-skl10/boot.html
>[9]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11859/shard-skl1/boot.html
>[10]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11859/shard-skl1/boot.html
>[11]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11859/shard-skl3/boot.html
>[12]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11859/shard-skl3/boot.html
>[13]:
>
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915/ttm: fix large buffer population trucation
Similar failures are noticed from https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/97804/ I address the failures and updated the filters. These are related to https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/4729 igt@kms_plane_cursor@.*<mailto:igt@kms_plane_cursor@.*> - fail - Failed assertion: !mismatch || igt_skip_crc_compare https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/3653 igt@kms_big_fb.*<mailto:igt@kms_big_fb.*> - fail - Failed assertion: !mismatch || igt_skip_crc_compare Thanks, Lakshmi. From: Matthew Auld Sent: Monday, December 13, 2021 5:09 AM To: Intel Graphics Development ; Vudum, Lakshminarayana Cc: Robert Beckett Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915/ttm: fix large buffer population trucation On Sat, 11 Dec 2021 at 18:46, Patchwork mailto:patchw...@emeril.freedesktop.org>> wrote: Patch Details Series: drm/i915/ttm: fix large buffer population trucation URL: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/97881/ State: failure Details: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21826/index.html CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_10988_full -> Patchwork_21826_full Summary FAILURE Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_21826_full absolutely need to be verified manually. If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes introduced in Patchwork_21826_full, please notify your bug team to allow them to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI. Participating hosts (10 -> 10) No changes in participating hosts Possible new issues Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in Patchwork_21826_full: IGT changes Possible regressions * igt@kms_big_fb@linear-64bpp-rotate-180: * shard-iclb: PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10988/shard-iclb2/igt@kms_big...@linear-64bpp-rotate-180.html> -> FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21826/shard-iclb5/igt@kms_big...@linear-64bpp-rotate-180.html> * igt@kms_plane_cursor@pipe-a-viewport-size-64: * shard-glk: PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10988/shard-glk1/igt@kms_plane_cur...@pipe-a-viewport-size-64.html> -> FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21826/shard-glk4/igt@kms_plane_cur...@pipe-a-viewport-size-64.html> Lakshmi, these are both false positives. Patch in question is specific to discrete platforms. * Known issues Here are the changes found in Patchwork_21826_full that come from known issues: CI changes Issues hit * boot: * shard-apl: (PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10988/shard-apl6/boot.html>, PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10988/shard-apl1/boot.html>, PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10988/shard-apl1/boot.html>, PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10988/shard-apl1/boot.html>, PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10988/shard-apl1/boot.html>, PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10988/shard-apl2/boot.html>, PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10988/shard-apl2/boot.html>, PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10988/shard-apl2/boot.html>, PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10988/shard-apl8/boot.html>, PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10988/shard-apl8/boot.html>, PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10988/shard-apl8/boot.html>, PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10988/shard-apl3/boot.html>, PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10988/shard-apl3/boot.html>, PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10988/shard-apl3/boot.html>, PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10988/shard-apl4/boot.html>, PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10988/shard-apl4/boot.html>, PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10988/shard-apl7/boot.html>, PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10988/shard-apl7/boot.html>, PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10988/shard-apl4/boot.html>, PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10988/shard-apl4/boot.html>, PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10988/shard-apl7/boot.html>, PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10988/shard-apl6/boot.html>, PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10988/shard-apl7/boot.html>, PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10988/shard-apl6/boot.html>, PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10988/shard-apl6/boot.html>) -> (PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21826/shard-apl8/boot.html>, PASS&l
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915: Don't leak the capture list items (rev2)
Regressions are related to https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/4729 igt@kms_plane_cursor@.*<mailto:igt@kms_plane_cursor@.*> - fail - Failed assertion: !mismatch || igt_skip_crc_compare https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/3653 igt@kms_big_fb.*<mailto:igt@kms_big_fb.*> - fail - Failed assertion: !mismatch || igt_skip_crc_compare Patch is re-reported. Thanks, Lakshmi. From: Thomas Hellström Sent: Monday, December 13, 2021 1:51 AM To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Vudum, Lakshminarayana Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915: Don't leak the capture list items (rev2) On Sat, 2021-12-11 at 09:49 +, Patchwork wrote: Patch Details Series: drm/i915: Don't leak the capture list items (rev2) URL: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/97804/ State: failure Details: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21820/index.html CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_10988_full -> Patchwork_21820_full Summary FAILURE Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_21820_full absolutely need to be verified manually. If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes introduced in Patchwork_21820_full, please notify your bug team to allow them to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI. Participating hosts (10 -> 10) No changes in participating hosts Possible new issues Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in Patchwork_21820_full: IGT changes Possible regressions * igt@kms_big_fb@linear-64bpp-rotate-180: * shard-iclb: PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10988/shard-iclb2/igt@kms_big...@linear-64bpp-rotate-180.html> -> FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21820/shard-iclb6/igt@kms_big...@linear-64bpp-rotate-180.html> * igt@kms_plane_cursor@pipe-a-viewport-size-64: * shard-glk: PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10988/shard-glk1/igt@kms_plane_cur...@pipe-a-viewport-size-64.html> -> FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21820/shard-glk3/igt@kms_plane_cur...@pipe-a-viewport-size-64.html> Lakshmi, The above errors are unrelated. Thanks, Thomas
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915/debugfs: add noreclaim annotations (rev2)
All are known issues. Re-reported the results.
-Original Message-
From: Auld, Matthew
Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2021 1:26 AM
To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Vudum, Lakshminarayana
Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915/debugfs: add noreclaim
annotations (rev2)
On 14/12/2021 04:55, Patchwork wrote:
> *Patch Details*
> *Series:* drm/i915/debugfs: add noreclaim annotations (rev2)
> *URL:*https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/97966/
> <https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/97966/>
> *State:* failure
> *Details:*
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21842/index.html
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21842/index.html>
>
>
> CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_10996_full -> Patchwork_21842_full
>
>
> Summary
>
> *FAILURE*
>
> Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_21842_full absolutely
> need to be verified manually.
>
> If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
> introduced in Patchwork_21842_full, please notify your bug team to
> allow them to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false
> positives in CI.
>
>
> Participating hosts (10 -> 10)
>
> No changes in participating hosts
>
>
> Possible new issues
>
> Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in
> Patchwork_21842_full:
>
>
> IGT changes
>
>
> Possible regressions
>
> *
>
> igt@kms_psr2_sf@overlay-primary-update-sf-dmg-area:
>
> o
>
> shard-iclb: NOTRUN -> SKIP
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21842/shard-iclb8/
> igt@kms_psr2...@overlay-primary-update-sf-dmg-area.html>
>
> o
>
> shard-tglb: NOTRUN -> SKIP
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21842/shard-tglb3/
> igt@kms_psr2...@overlay-primary-update-sf-dmg-area.html>
>
> *
>
> igt@perf@enable-disable:
>
> o shard-glk: PASS
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10996/shard-glk1/igt@p...@enable-disable.html>
> -> FAIL
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21842/shard-glk1/i
> gt@p...@enable-disable.html>
>
>
> Suppressed
>
> The following results come from untrusted machines, tests, or statuses.
> They do not affect the overall result.
>
> * igt@kms_psr2_sf@primary-plane-update-sf-dmg-area:
> o {shard-rkl}: NOTRUN -> SKIP
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21842/shard-rkl-1/
> igt@kms_psr2...@primary-plane-update-sf-dmg-area.html>
>
These all look to be unrelated.
>
> Known issues
>
> Here are the changes found in Patchwork_21842_full that come from
> known
> issues:
>
>
> IGT changes
>
>
> Issues hit
>
> *
>
> igt@gem_ctx_isolation@preservation-s3@rcs0:
>
> o shard-apl: PASS
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10996/shard-apl4/igt@gem_ctx_isolation@preservation...@rcs0.html>
> -> DMESG-WARN
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21842/shard-apl2/igt@gem_ctx_isolation@preservation...@rcs0.html>
> ([i915#180]) +2 similar issues
> *
>
> igt@gem_ctx_isolation@preservation-s3@vcs0:
>
> o shard-kbl: PASS
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10996/shard-kbl6/igt@gem_ctx_isolation@preservation...@vcs0.html>
> -> DMESG-WARN
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21842/shard-kbl7/igt@gem_ctx_isolation@preservation...@vcs0.html>
> ([i915#180]) +5 similar issues
> *
>
> igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-deadline:
>
> o shard-kbl: PASS
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10996/shard-kbl7/igt@gem_exec_f...@basic-deadline.html>
> -> FAIL
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21842/shard-kbl1/igt@gem_exec_f...@basic-deadline.html>
> ([i915#2846])
> *
>
> igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-share@rcs0:
>
> o shard-glk: PASS
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_10996/shard-glk8/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-sh...@rcs0.html>
> -> FAIL
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21842/shard-glk3/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-sh...@rcs0.html>
> ([i915#2842])
> *
>
> igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-solo@rcs0:
>
>
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for More preparation for multi gt patches
Regressions are related to
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/2842
igt@gem_exec_fair@.* - fail - Failed assertion: iqr[nchild / 2] < result[nchild
/ 2], Child frame IQR .*ms exceeded median threshold .*m s
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/4817
igt@i915_suspend@sysfs-reader - incomplete - PM: suspend entry (deep)
I think re-reporting is not required as we may haver results from another rev.
Lakshmi.
-Original Message-
From: Roper, Matthew D
Sent: Friday, December 17, 2021 10:11 PM
To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: Andi Shyti ; Vudum, Lakshminarayana
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for More preparation for multi gt
patches
On Wed, Dec 15, 2021 at 07:25:17AM +, Patchwork wrote:
> == Series Details ==
>
> Series: More preparation for multi gt patches
> URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/98032/
> State : failure
>
> == Summary ==
>
> CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11002_full -> Patchwork_21849_full
>
>
> Summary
> ---
>
> **FAILURE**
>
> Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_21849_full absolutely need to
> be
> verified manually.
>
> If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
> introduced in Patchwork_21849_full, please notify your bug team to allow
> them
> to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI.
>
>
>
> Participating hosts (10 -> 10)
> --
>
> No changes in participating hosts
>
> Possible new issues
> ---
>
> Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in
> Patchwork_21849_full:
>
> ### IGT changes ###
>
> Possible regressions
>
> * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none@vcs1:
> - shard-iclb: NOTRUN -> [FAIL][1]
>[1]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21849/shard-iclb4/i
> gt@gem_exec_fair@basic-n...@vcs1.html
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/2842
>
> * igt@i915_suspend@sysfs-reader:
> - shard-skl: [PASS][2] -> [INCOMPLETE][3]
>[2]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11002/shard-skl8/igt@i915_susp...@sysfs-reader.html
>[3]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21849/shard-skl10/i
> gt@i915_susp...@sysfs-reader.html
Looks similar to this ADL-P issue that was seen only once:
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/4092
The first 10 patches have gone through several clean CI cycles now, so I've
pushed those to drm-intel-gt-next. There are just a couple minor comments on
the ggtt patches, so we can push the rest of those once the comments are
addressed.
BTW, there's one i915->gt reference in the display code that has moved from
display/intel_display.c to display/skl_universal_plane.c on drm-intel-next, but
that movement hasn't made its way to drm-intel-gt-next yet. This led to a
merge conflict while rebuilding drm-tip. I had to use a 'dim cat-to-fixup' to
apply the following diff to the drm-intel-gt-next merge commit:
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/skl_universal_plane.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/skl_universal_plane.c
index 158d89b8d490..b3162f49f341 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/skl_universal_plane.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/skl_universal_plane.c
@@ -1737,7 +1737,7 @@ static bool bo_has_valid_encryption(struct
drm_i915_gem_object *obj)
{
struct drm_i915_private *i915 = to_i915(obj->base.dev);
- return intel_pxp_key_check(&i915->gt.pxp, obj, false) == 0;
+ return intel_pxp_key_check(&to_gt(i915)->pxp, obj, false) == 0;
}
static bool pxp_is_borked(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj)
Matt
>
>
> Known issues
>
>
> Here are the changes found in Patchwork_21849_full that come from known
> issues:
>
> ### CI changes ###
>
> Issues hit
>
> * boot:
> - shard-snb: ([PASS][4], [PASS][5], [PASS][6], [PASS][7],
> [PASS][8], [PASS][9], [PASS][10], [PASS][11], [PASS][12], [PASS][13],
> [PASS][14], [PASS][15], [PASS][16], [PASS][17], [PASS][18], [PASS][19],
> [PASS][20], [PASS][21], [PASS][22], [PASS][23], [PASS][24], [PASS][25],
> [PASS][26], [PASS][27], [PASS][28]) -> ([PASS][29], [PASS][30], [PASS][31],
> [PASS][32], [PASS][33], [PASS][34], [PASS][35], [PASS][36], [PASS][37],
> [PASS][38], [PASS][39], [PASS][40], [PASS][41], [PASS][42], [FAIL][43],
> [PASS][44], [PASS][45], [PASS][46], [PASS][47], [PASS][48], [PASS][49],
> [PASS][50], [PASS][51], [PASS][52], [PASS][53]) ([i915#4338])
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for series starting with [v2,1/4] drm/i915: don't call free_mmap_offset when purging
I believe that's because of missing machine Missing (7): bat-dg1-6 bat-dg1-5 fi-bsw-cyan bat-adlp-6 bat-rpls-1 fi-bdw-samus bat-jsl-1 Looks like DG1 results were not used while the report is generated. Good that you checked the full logs. +@Latvala, Petri Lakshmi. -Original Message- From: Auld, Matthew Sent: Thursday, January 6, 2022 10:07 AM To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Vudum, Lakshminarayana Subject: Re: ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for series starting with [v2,1/4] drm/i915: don't call free_mmap_offset when purging Lakshmi, any idea why this reports as success? Clicking on the "See full logs" for BAT there is a clear new failure on DG1 in one of the selftests, which is caused by this series. It also doesn't appear in the issues hit below. On 06/01/2022 12:32, Patchwork wrote: > *Patch Details* > *Series:* series starting with [v2,1/4] drm/i915: don't call > free_mmap_offset when purging > *URL:*https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/98548/ > <https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/98548/> > *State:* success > *Details:* > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21930/index.html > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21930/index.html> > > > CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11052 -> Patchwork_21930 > > > Summary > > *SUCCESS* > > No regressions found. > > External URL: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21930/index.html > > > Participating hosts (44 -> 37) > > Missing (7): bat-dg1-6 bat-dg1-5 fi-bsw-cyan bat-adlp-6 bat-rpls-1 > fi-bdw-samus bat-jsl-1 > > > Known issues > > Here are the changes found in Patchwork_21930 that come from known issues: > > > IGT changes > > > Issues hit > > * > > igt@amdgpu/amd_basic@semaphore: > > o fi-bdw-5557u: NOTRUN -> SKIP > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21930/fi-bdw-5557u/igt@amdgpu/amd_ba...@semaphore.html> > (fdo#109271 > <https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109271>) +31 > similar issues > * > > igt@amdgpu/amd_cs_nop@sync-compute0: > > o fi-kbl-soraka: NOTRUN -> SKIP > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21930/fi-kbl-soraka/igt@amdgpu/amd_cs_...@sync-compute0.html> > (fdo#109271 > <https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109271>) +6 > similar issues > * > > igt@amdgpu/amd_prime@i915-to-amd: > > o fi-snb-2520m: NOTRUN -> SKIP > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21930/fi-snb-2520m/igt@amdgpu/amd_pr...@i915-to-amd.html> > (fdo#109271 > <https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109271>) +17 > similar issues > * > > igt@gem_exec_suspend@basic-s3: > > o fi-skl-6600u: NOTRUN -> INCOMPLETE > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21930/fi-skl-6600u/igt@gem_exec_susp...@basic-s3.html> > (i915#4547 <https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/4547>) > * > > igt@kms_chamelium@dp-crc-fast: > > o fi-bdw-5557u: NOTRUN -> SKIP > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21930/fi-bdw-5557u/igt@kms_chamel...@dp-crc-fast.html> > (fdo#109271 > <https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109271> / > fdo#111827 > <https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=111827>) +8 > similar issues > > > Possible fixes > > * > > igt@gem_exec_suspend@basic-s3@smem: > > o fi-icl-u2: FAIL > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11052/fi-icl-u2/igt@gem_exec_suspend@basic...@smem.html> > (i915#1888 > <https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/1888>) -> PASS > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21930/fi-icl-u2/igt@gem_exec_suspend@basic...@smem.html> > * > > igt@i915_selftest@live@gt_contexts: > > o fi-snb-2520m: DMESG-FAIL > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11052/fi-snb-2520m/igt@i915_selftest@live@gt_contexts.html> > (i915#4610 > <https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/4610>) -> PASS > > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_21930/fi-snb-2520m > /igt@i915_selftest@live@gt_contexts.html> > > > Build changes > > * Linux: CI_DRM_11052 -> Patchwork_21930 > > CI-20190529: 20190529 > CI_DRM_11
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/gem: missing boundary check in vm_access leads to OOB read/write (rev2)
From: Matthew Auld Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2022 1:21 AM To: Intel Graphics Development ; Vudum, Lakshminarayana Cc: Katragadda, MastanX Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/gem: missing boundary check in vm_access leads to OOB read/write (rev2) On Thu, 3 Mar 2022 at 06:48, Patchwork mailto:patchw...@emeril.freedesktop.org>> wrote: Patch Details Series: drm/i915/gem: missing boundary check in vm_access leads to OOB read/write (rev2) URL: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/100932/ State: failure Details: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22468/index.html CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11316 -> Patchwork_22468 Summary FAILURE Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_22468 absolutely need to be verified manually. If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes introduced in Patchwork_22468, please notify your bug team to allow them to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI. External URL: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22468/index.html Participating hosts (50 -> 41) Additional (1): bat-adlp-4 Missing (10): fi-kbl-soraka shard-tglu bat-dg1-5 fi-hsw-4200u fi-bsw-cyan fi-ctg-p8600 shard-rkl shard-dg1 bat-jsl-2 fi-bdw-samus Possible new issues Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in Patchwork_22468: IGT changes Possible regressions * igt@gem_exec_suspend@basic-s0@smem: * fi-kbl-7567u: PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11316/fi-kbl-7567u/igt@gem_exec_suspend@basic...@smem.html> -> DMESG-WARN<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22468/fi-kbl-7567u/igt@gem_exec_suspend@basic...@smem.html> Lakshmi: This issue is related to https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/4116 * igt@i915_pm_rpm@basic-pci-d3-state: * fi-skl-6600u: PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11316/fi-skl-6600u/igt@i915_pm_...@basic-pci-d3-state.html> -> FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22468/fi-skl-6600u/igt@i915_pm_...@basic-pci-d3-state.html> Lakshmi: This looks like a new issue, so filed https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/5290 igt@i915_pm_rpm@basic-pci-d3-state - fail - Failed assertion: igt_wait(device_in_pci_d3(), \d+, \d+) These failures are not related. * Known issues Here are the changes found in Patchwork_22468 that come from known issues: IGT changes Issues hit * igt@gem_lmem_swapping@basic: * bat-adlp-4: NOTRUN -> SKIP<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22468/bat-adlp-4/igt@gem_lmem_swapp...@basic.html> (i915#4613<https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/4613>) +3 similar issues * igt@gem_tiled_pread_basic: * bat-adlp-4: NOTRUN -> SKIP<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22468/bat-adlp-4/igt@gem_tiled_pread_basic.html> (i915#3282<https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/3282>) * igt@kms_busy@basic@modeset: * bat-adlp-4: NOTRUN -> DMESG-WARN<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22468/bat-adlp-4/igt@kms_busy@ba...@modeset.html> (i915#3576<https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/3576>) * igt@kms_chamelium@vga-hpd-fast: * bat-adlp-4: NOTRUN -> SKIP<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22468/bat-adlp-4/igt@kms_chamel...@vga-hpd-fast.html> (fdo#111827<https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=111827>) +8 similar issues * igt@kms_cursor_legacy@basic-busy-flip-before-cursor-legacy: * bat-adlp-4: NOTRUN -> SKIP<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22468/bat-adlp-4/igt@kms_cursor_leg...@basic-busy-flip-before-cursor-legacy.html> (i915#4103<https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/4103>) +1 similar issue * igt@kms_force_connector_basic@force-load-detect: * bat-adlp-4: NOTRUN -> SKIP<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22468/bat-adlp-4/igt@kms_force_connector_ba...@force-load-detect.html> (fdo#109285<https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109285>) * igt@prime_vgem@basic-fence-read: * bat-adlp-4: NOTRUN -> SKIP<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22468/bat-adlp-4/igt@prime_v...@basic-fence-read.html> (i915#3291<https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/3291> / i915#3708<https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/3708>) +2 similar issues * igt@prime_vgem@basic-userptr: * bat-adlp-4: NOTRUN -> SKIP<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22468/bat-adlp-4/igt@prime_v...@basic-userptr.html> (i915#3301<https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/3301> / i915#3708<https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/3708>) * igt@runner@aborted: * fi-kbl-7567u: NOTRUN -> FAIL&
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915: Reduce stack usage in debugfs due to SSEU
Issue is related to https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/3576
[ADL-P] KMS tests - dmesg-warn/dmesg-fail - *ERROR* CPU pipe A FIFO underrun:
(port|soft),transcoder,
And the latest reg from rev 2 is
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/5343
igt@i915_pm_dc@dc5-psr - crash - Received signal SIGSEGV.
Thanks,
Lakshmi.
-Original Message-
From: Roper, Matthew D
Sent: Monday, March 14, 2022 9:34 PM
To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: Vudum, Lakshminarayana
Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915: Reduce stack usage in debugfs
due to SSEU
On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 03:01:44AM +, Patchwork wrote:
> == Series Details ==
>
> Series: drm/i915: Reduce stack usage in debugfs due to SSEU
> URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/101369/
> State : failure
>
> == Summary ==
>
> CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11363 -> Patchwork_22566
>
>
> Summary
> ---
>
> **FAILURE**
>
> Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_22566 absolutely need to be
> verified manually.
>
> If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
> introduced in Patchwork_22566, please notify your bug team to allow them
> to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI.
>
> External URL:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22566/index.html
>
> Participating hosts (50 -> 43)
> --
>
> Additional (3): bat-adlm-1 bat-adlp-4 fi-kbl-8809g
> Missing(10): shard-tglu fi-hsw-4200u shard-rkl fi-icl-u2 fi-bsw-cyan
> fi-kbl-7500u fi-ctg-p8600 fi-hsw-4770 bat-rpls-2 fi-bdw-samus
>
> Possible new issues
> ---
>
> Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in
> Patchwork_22566:
>
> ### IGT changes ###
>
> Possible regressions
>
> * igt@kms_flip@basic-flip-vs-modeset@a-edp1:
> - bat-adlp-4: NOTRUN -> [DMESG-WARN][1]
>[1]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22566/bat-adlp-4/ig
> t@kms_flip@basic-flip-vs-mode...@a-edp1.html
<3> [273.206566] i915 :00:02.0: [drm] *ERROR* CPU pipe A FIFO underrun:
port,transcoder,
A display underrun wouldn't be related to how a debugfs file (which isn't being
used here) allocates memory.
It seems like there are also a bunch of missing machines listed above for no
apparent reason. Submitting a re-test.
Matt
>
>
> Suppressed
>
> The following results come from untrusted machines, tests, or statuses.
> They do not affect the overall result.
>
> * igt@kms_busy@basic@flip:
> - {bat-adlp-6}: [PASS][2] -> [DMESG-WARN][3]
>[2]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11363/bat-adlp-6/igt@kms_busy@ba...@flip.html
>[3]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22566/bat-adlp-6/ig
> t@kms_busy@ba...@flip.html
>
> * igt@kms_pipe_crc_basic@suspend-read-crc-pipe-a:
> - {bat-dg2-9}:[DMESG-WARN][4] ([i915#5193]) -> [DMESG-FAIL][5]
>[4]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11363/bat-dg2-9/igt@kms_pipe_crc_ba...@suspend-read-crc-pipe-a.html
>[5]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22566/bat-dg2-9/igt
> @kms_pipe_crc_ba...@suspend-read-crc-pipe-a.html
>
>
> Known issues
>
>
> Here are the changes found in Patchwork_22566 that come from known issues:
>
> ### IGT changes ###
>
> Issues hit
>
> * igt@gem_exec_suspend@basic-s0@smem:
> - fi-kbl-8809g: NOTRUN -> [DMESG-WARN][6] ([i915#4962]) +1 similar
> issue
>[6]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22566/fi-kbl-8809g/
> igt@gem_exec_suspend@basic...@smem.html
>
> * igt@gem_huc_copy@huc-copy:
> - fi-kbl-8809g: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][7] ([fdo#109271] / [i915#2190])
>[7]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22566/fi-kbl-8809g/
> igt@gem_huc_c...@huc-copy.html
>
> * igt@gem_lmem_swapping@basic:
> - bat-adlp-4: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][8] ([i915#4613]) +3 similar issues
>[8]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22566/bat-adlp-4/ig
> t@gem_lmem_swapp...@basic.html
>
> * igt@gem_lmem_swapping@random-engines:
> - fi-kbl-8809g: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][9] ([fdo#109271] / [i915#4613]) +3
> similar issues
>[9]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22566/fi-kbl-8809g/
> igt@gem_lmem_swapp...@random-engines.html
>
> * igt@gem_tiled_pread_basic:
> - bat-adlp-4: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][10] ([i915#3282])
>[10]:
> https://in
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for Some more bits for small BAR enabling (rev4)
Filed https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/5349
igt@kms_cursor_legacy@pipe-b-torture-bo - incomplete - No warnings/errors
Thanks,
Lakshmi.
-Original Message-
From: Matthew Auld
Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2022 5:37 AM
To: Intel Graphics Development ; Vudum,
Lakshminarayana
Cc: Auld, Matthew
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for Some more bits for small BAR
enabling (rev4)
On Mon, 14 Mar 2022 at 16:49, Patchwork
wrote:
>
> Patch Details
> Series:Some more bits for small BAR enabling (rev4)
> URL:https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/101052/
> State:failure
> Details:https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22555/index
> .html
>
> CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11358_full -> Patchwork_22555_full
>
> Summary
>
> FAILURE
>
> Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_22555_full absolutely
> need to be verified manually.
>
> If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
> introduced in Patchwork_22555_full, please notify your bug team to
> allow them to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false
> positives in CI.
>
> Participating hosts (12 -> 12)
>
> No changes in participating hosts
>
> Possible new issues
>
> Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in
> Patchwork_22555_full:
>
> IGT changes
>
> Possible regressions
>
> igt@kms_cursor_legacy@pipe-b-torture-bo:
>
> shard-glk: PASS -> INCOMPLETE
Fairly sure this is unrelated. Realistically this series should only really
change things for discrete.
>
> Known issues
>
> Here are the changes found in Patchwork_22555_full that come from known
> issues:
>
> CI changes
>
> Possible fixes
>
> boot:
>
> shard-glk: (PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS, FAIL, PASS, PASS,
> PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS,
> PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS) ([i915#4392]) -> (PASS, PASS, PASS,
> PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS,
> PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS)
>
> {shard-rkl}: (PASS, PASS, FAIL, PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS,
> PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS,
> PASS) ([i915#5131]) -> (PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS,
> PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS, PASS,
> PASS, PASS)
>
> IGT changes
>
> Issues hit
>
> igt@gem_ccs@block-copy-compressed:
>
> shard-tglb: NOTRUN -> SKIP ([i915#5325])
>
> shard-iclb: NOTRUN -> SKIP ([i915#5327])
>
> igt@gem_create@create-massive:
>
> shard-iclb: NOTRUN -> DMESG-WARN ([i915#4991]) +1 similar issue
>
> igt@gem_exec_balancer@parallel-contexts:
>
> shard-kbl: NOTRUN -> DMESG-WARN ([i915#5076])
>
> igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-share@rcs0:
>
> shard-iclb: PASS -> FAIL ([i915#2842])
>
> igt@gem_huc_copy@huc-copy:
>
> shard-tglb: PASS -> SKIP ([i915#2190])
>
> igt@gem_lmem_swapping@heavy-verify-multi:
>
> shard-kbl: NOTRUN -> SKIP ([fdo#109271] / [i915#4613])
>
> shard-apl: NOTRUN -> SKIP ([fdo#109271] / [i915#4613])
>
> igt@gem_lmem_swapping@random-engines:
>
> shard-iclb: NOTRUN -> SKIP ([i915#4613]) +1 similar issue
>
> igt@gem_lmem_swapping@verify-random:
>
> shard-skl: NOTRUN -> SKIP ([fdo#109271] / [i915#4613]) +1 similar
> issue
>
> igt@gem_pxp@create-protected-buffer:
>
> shard-iclb: NOTRUN -> SKIP ([i915#4270]) +1 similar issue
>
> igt@gem_pxp@verify-pxp-stale-ctx-execution:
>
> shard-tglb: NOTRUN -> SKIP ([i915#4270])
>
> igt@gem_render_copy@y-tiled-ccs-to-y-tiled-mc-ccs:
>
> shard-iclb: NOTRUN -> SKIP ([i915#768]) +2 similar issues
>
> igt@gem_userptr_blits@unsync-overlap:
>
> shard-iclb: NOTRUN -> SKIP ([i915#3297]) +1 similar issue
>
> igt@gen7_exec_parse@basic-offset:
>
> shard-tglb: NOTRUN -> SKIP ([fdo#109289])
>
> igt@gen7_exec_parse@chained-batch:
>
> shard-iclb: NOTRUN -> SKIP ([fdo#109289]) +3 similar issues
>
> igt@gen9_exec_parse@allowed-single:
>
> shard-skl: PASS -> DMESG-WARN ([i915#1436] / [i915#716])
>
> igt@gen9_exec_parse@batch-without-end:
>
> shard-iclb: NOTRUN -> SKIP ([i915#2856]) +1 similar issue
>
> igt@i915_pm_dc@dc6-psr:
>
> shard-iclb: PASS -> FAIL ([i915#454])
>
> igt@i915_pm_rpm@dpms-mode-unset-non-lpsp:
>
> shard-iclb: NOTRUN -> SKIP ([fdo#110892])
>
> igt@i915_suspend@fence-restore-untiled:
>
> shard-kbl: PASS -> DMESG-WARN ([i915#180])
>
> igt@kms_addfb_basic@invalid-smem-bo-on-discrete:
>
> shard-iclb: NOTRUN -> SKIP ([i915#3826])
>
> igt@kms_big_fb@4-tiled-32bpp-rotate-270:
>
> shard-i
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for series starting with [CI,1/7] drm/i915/lmem: don't treat small BAR as an error
I have re-opened this issue and re-reported.
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/2995
Lakshmi.
-Original Message-
From: Auld, Matthew
Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2022 2:15 AM
To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Vudum, Lakshminarayana
Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for series starting with [CI,1/7]
drm/i915/lmem: don't treat small BAR as an error
On 16/03/2022 00:38, Patchwork wrote:
> *Patch Details*
> *Series:* series starting with [CI,1/7] drm/i915/lmem: don't treat small
> BAR as an error
> *URL:*https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/101398/
> <https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/101398/>
> *State:* failure
> *Details:*
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22576/index.html
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22576/index.html>
>
>
> CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11365_full -> Patchwork_22576_full
>
>
> Summary
>
> *FAILURE*
>
> Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_22576_full absolutely
> need to be verified manually.
>
> If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
> introduced in Patchwork_22576_full, please notify your bug team to
> allow them to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false
> positives in CI.
>
>
> Participating hosts (13 -> 13)
>
> No changes in participating hosts
>
>
> Possible new issues
>
> Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in
> Patchwork_22576_full:
>
>
> IGT changes
>
>
> Possible regressions
>
> * igt@kms_sequence@queue-busy:
> o shard-skl: PASS
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11365/shard-skl1/igt@kms_seque...@queue-busy.html>
> -> FAIL
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22576/shard-skl3/i
> gt@kms_seque...@queue-busy.html>
Looks to be unrelated.
>
>
> Suppressed
>
> The following results come from untrusted machines, tests, or statuses.
> They do not affect the overall result.
>
> *
>
> igt@gem_ccs@block-copy-inplace:
>
> o {shard-dg1}: NOTRUN -> SKIP
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22576/shard-dg1-12/igt@gem_...@block-copy-inplace.html>
> *
>
> igt@gem_eio@in-flight-suspend:
>
> o {shard-rkl}: PASS
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11365/shard-rkl-1/igt@gem_...@in-flight-suspend.html>
> -> FAIL
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22576/shard-rkl-4/
> igt@gem_...@in-flight-suspend.html>
>
>
> Known issues
>
> Here are the changes found in Patchwork_22576_full that come from
> known
> issues:
>
>
> IGT changes
>
>
> Issues hit
>
> *
>
> igt@feature_discovery@chamelium:
>
> o shard-iclb: NOTRUN -> SKIP
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22576/shard-iclb2/igt@feature_discov...@chamelium.html>
> ([fdo#111827])
> *
>
> igt@gem_eio@unwedge-stress:
>
> o
>
> shard-tglb: PASS
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11365/shard-tglb7/igt@gem_...@unwedge-stress.html>
> -> FAIL
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22576/shard-tglb8/igt@gem_...@unwedge-stress.html>
> ([i915#232])
>
> o
>
> shard-skl: PASS
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11365/shard-skl4/igt@gem_...@unwedge-stress.html>
> -> TIMEOUT
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22576/shard-skl7/igt@gem_...@unwedge-stress.html>
> ([i915#3063])
>
> *
>
> igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-deadline:
>
> o shard-skl: NOTRUN -> FAIL
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22576/shard-skl3/igt@gem_exec_f...@basic-deadline.html>
> ([i915#2846])
> *
>
> igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-vip@rcs0:
>
> o shard-tglb: PASS
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11365/shard-tglb6/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-...@rcs0.html>
> -> FAIL
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22576/shard-tglb3/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-...@rcs0.html>
> ([i915#2842])
> *
>
> igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none@vecs0:
>
> o shard-apl: PASS
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for series starting with [1/2] drm/i915: Fix renamed struct field
Regression is related to https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/4391 All tests - dmesg-warn/dmesg-fail - *ERROR* AUX B/DDI B/PHY B: did not complete or timeout within 10ms (status 0xad4003ff) Re-reported the results. Lakshmi. -Original Message- From: De Marchi, Lucas Sent: Friday, March 18, 2022 7:52 AM To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org Cc: Vudum, Lakshminarayana Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for series starting with [1/2] drm/i915: Fix renamed struct field On Thu, Mar 17, 2022 at 04:14:16AM +, Patchwork wrote: >== Series Details == > >Series: series starting with [1/2] drm/i915: Fix renamed struct field >URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/101448/ >State : failure > >== Summary == > >CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11372_full -> Patchwork_22590_full > > >Summary >--- > > **FAILURE** > > Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_22590_full absolutely > need to be verified manually. > > If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes > introduced in Patchwork_22590_full, please notify your bug team to > allow them to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false > positives in CI. > > > >Participating hosts (11 -> 11) >-- > > No changes in participating hosts > >Possible new issues >--- > > Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in > Patchwork_22590_full: > >### IGT changes ### > > Possible regressions > > * igt@gem_mmap_wc@write-wc-read-gtt: >- shard-skl: [PASS][1] -> [INCOMPLETE][2] > [1]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11372/shard-skl9/igt@gem_mmap...@write-wc-read-gtt.html > [2]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22590/shard-skl6/ig > t@gem_mmap...@write-wc-read-gtt.html nothing related to this series that only changes the behavior for media engine on media_ver >= 11 Lucas De Marchi > > >Known issues > > > Here are the changes found in Patchwork_22590_full that come from known > issues: > >### IGT changes ### > > Issues hit > > * igt@gem_ctx_isolation@preservation-s3@vcs0: >- shard-kbl: [PASS][3] -> [DMESG-WARN][4] ([i915#180]) +3 similar > issues > [3]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11372/shard-kbl1/igt@gem_ctx_isolation@preservation...@vcs0.html > [4]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22590/shard-kbl7/ig > t@gem_ctx_isolation@preservation...@vcs0.html > > * igt@gem_exec_capture@pi@rcs0: >- shard-skl: [PASS][5] -> [INCOMPLETE][6] ([i915#4547]) > [5]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11372/shard-skl10/igt@gem_exec_capture@p...@rcs0.html > [6]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22590/shard-skl4/ig > t@gem_exec_capture@p...@rcs0.html > > * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none@vcs0: >- shard-kbl: [PASS][7] -> [FAIL][8] ([i915#2842]) +2 similar > issues > [7]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11372/shard-kbl1/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-n...@vcs0.html > [8]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22590/shard-kbl3/ig > t@gem_exec_fair@basic-n...@vcs0.html > > * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace-share@rcs0: >- shard-tglb: [PASS][9] -> [FAIL][10] ([i915#2842]) > [9]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11372/shard-tglb5/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace-sh...@rcs0.html > [10]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22590/shard-tglb5/i > gt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace-sh...@rcs0.html > > * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace-solo@rcs0: >- shard-glk: NOTRUN -> [FAIL][11] ([i915#2842]) +1 similar issue > [11]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22590/shard-glk9/ig > t@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace-s...@rcs0.html > > * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-throttle@rcs0: >- shard-glk: [PASS][12] -> [FAIL][13] ([i915#2842]) > [12]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11372/shard-glk5/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-throt...@rcs0.html > [13]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22590/shard-glk3/ig > t@gem_exec_fair@basic-throt...@rcs0.html > > * igt@gem_exec_suspend@basic-s3@smem: >- shard-apl: [PASS][14] -> [DMESG-WARN][15] ([i915#180]) +4 > similar issues > [14]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11372/shard-apl2/igt@gem_exec_suspend@basic...@smem.html > [15]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22590/shard-apl3/ig > t@gem_exec_suspe
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915/dg2: Add preemption changes for Wa_14015141709 (rev2)
Yes, I have re-opened the issue #3812 and re-reported.
-Original Message-
From: Roper, Matthew D
Sent: Friday, March 18, 2022 10:21 AM
To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: Vudum, Lakshminarayana
Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915/dg2: Add preemption changes for
Wa_14015141709 (rev2)
On Fri, Mar 18, 2022 at 04:51:14AM +, Patchwork wrote:
> == Series Details ==
>
> Series: drm/i915/dg2: Add preemption changes for Wa_14015141709 (rev2)
> URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/101023/
> State : failure
>
> == Summary ==
>
> CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11379_full -> Patchwork_22602_full
>
>
> Summary
> ---
>
> **FAILURE**
>
> Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_22602_full absolutely need to
> be
> verified manually.
>
> If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
> introduced in Patchwork_22602_full, please notify your bug team to allow
> them
> to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI.
>
>
>
> Participating hosts (12 -> 12)
> --
>
> No changes in participating hosts
>
> Possible new issues
> ---
>
> Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in
> Patchwork_22602_full:
>
> ### IGT changes ###
>
> Possible regressions
>
> * igt@gem_exec_parallel@engines@contexts:
> - shard-iclb: [PASS][1] -> [INCOMPLETE][2]
>[1]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11379/shard-iclb7/igt@gem_exec_parallel@engi...@contexts.html
>[2]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22602/shard-iclb4/i
> gt@gem_exec_parallel@engi...@contexts.html
>
Unexpected incomplete with no apparent warnings/errors. Looks like we
previously had https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/3812
open for this but it wasn't seen for a while and got closed.
This patch doesn't change the behavior of ICL, so it shouldn't be the cause.
Patch applied to drm-intel-gt-next. Thanks Anusha for the review.
Matt
>
> Suppressed
>
> The following results come from untrusted machines, tests, or statuses.
> They do not affect the overall result.
>
> * igt@gem_exec_parallel@fds@vecs0:
> - {shard-rkl}:([PASS][3], [PASS][4]) -> [INCOMPLETE][5]
>[3]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11379/shard-rkl-4/igt@gem_exec_parallel@f...@vecs0.html
>[4]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11379/shard-rkl-5/igt@gem_exec_parallel@f...@vecs0.html
>[5]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22602/shard-rkl-5/i
> gt@gem_exec_parallel@f...@vecs0.html
>
>
> Known issues
>
>
> Here are the changes found in Patchwork_22602_full that come from known
> issues:
>
> ### IGT changes ###
>
> Issues hit
>
> * igt@gem_create@create-massive:
> - shard-apl: NOTRUN -> [DMESG-WARN][6] ([i915#4991])
>[6]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22602/shard-apl8/ig
> t@gem_cre...@create-massive.html
>
> * igt@gem_eio@kms:
> - shard-tglb: [PASS][7] -> [FAIL][8] ([i915#232])
>[7]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11379/shard-tglb6/igt@gem_...@kms.html
>[8]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22602/shard-tglb1/i
> gt@gem_...@kms.html
>
> * igt@gem_exec_capture@pi@bcs0:
> - shard-skl: NOTRUN -> [INCOMPLETE][9] ([i915#4547])
>[9]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22602/shard-skl6/ig
> t@gem_exec_capture@p...@bcs0.html
>
> * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-rrul@rcs0:
> - shard-iclb: NOTRUN -> [FAIL][10] ([i915#2842])
>[10]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22602/shard-iclb3/i
> gt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-r...@rcs0.html
>
> * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none@vcs0:
> - shard-kbl: [PASS][11] -> [FAIL][12] ([i915#2842]) +1 similar
> issue
>[11]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11379/shard-kbl3/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-n...@vcs0.html
>[12]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22602/shard-kbl4/ig
> t@gem_exec_fair@basic-n...@vcs0.html
>
> * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace-share@rcs0:
> - shard-tglb: [PASS][13] -> [FAIL][14] ([i915#2842])
>[13]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11379/shard-tglb6/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace-sh...@rcs0.html
>[14]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for Introduce multitile support
Issue is related to https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/1373 Few tests - incomplete - Kernel panic - not syncing: EXT4-fs (device nvme0n1p2): panic forced after error|Kernel panic - not syncing: EXT4-fs panic from previous error Lakshmi. -Original Message- From: Matthew Auld Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 3:05 AM To: Intel Graphics Development ; Vudum, Lakshminarayana Cc: Andi Shyti Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for Introduce multitile support On Sat, 19 Mar 2022 at 02:06, Patchwork wrote: > > Patch Details > Series:Introduce multitile support > URL:https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/101551/ > State:failure > Details:https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22617/index > .html > > CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11384_full -> Patchwork_22617_full > > Summary > > FAILURE > > Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_22617_full absolutely > need to be verified manually. > > If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes > introduced in Patchwork_22617_full, please notify your bug team to > allow them to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false > positives in CI. > > Participating hosts (12 -> 12) > > No changes in participating hosts > > Possible new issues > > Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in > Patchwork_22617_full: > > IGT changes > > Possible regressions > > igt@gem_workarounds@suspend-resume: > > shard-kbl: PASS -> INCOMPLETE Unrelated failure. Looks like filesystem related issue: <4>[ 122.379815] EXT4-fs warning (device nvme0n1p2): ext4_end_bio:346: I/O error 10 writing to inode 27001858 starting block 13317428) <6>[ 122.379827] nvme0n1: detected capacity change from 1000215216 to 0 <3>[ 122.379933] Buffer I/O error on device nvme0n1p2, logical block 13186100 <2>[ 122.380063] EXT4-fs error (device nvme0n1p2): __ext4_find_entry:1614: inode #24510583: comm systemd-udevd: reading directory lblock 0 <3>[ 122.380358] Aborting journal on device nvme0n1p2-8. <2>[ 122.380488] EXT4-fs error (device nvme0n1p2) in ext4_reserve_inode_write:5706: Journal has aborted <2>[ 122.380612] EXT4-fs error (device nvme0n1p2): ext4_journal_check_start:83: comm dmesg: Detected aborted journal <3>[ 122.380671] Buffer I/O error on dev nvme0n1p2, logical block 62423040, lost sync page write <3>[ 122.380721] JBD2: Error -5 detected when updating journal superblock for nvme0n1p2-8. <2>[ 122.380935] EXT4-fs error (device nvme0n1p2): ext4_journal_check_start:83: comm rs:main Q:Reg: Detected aborted journal <4>[ 122.381311] EXT4-fs warning (device nvme0n1p2): dx_probe:788: inode #3539533: lblock 0: comm systemd: error -5 reading directory block <4>[ 122.381428] EXT4-fs warning (device nvme0n1p2): dx_probe:788: inode #3539533: lblock 0: comm systemd: error -5 reading directory block <4>[ 122.381517] EXT4-fs warning (device nvme0n1p2): dx_probe:788: inode #3539533: lblock 0: comm systemd: error -5 reading directory block <4>[ 122.381588] EXT4-fs warning (device nvme0n1p2): dx_probe:788: inode #3539533: lblock 0: comm systemd: error -5 reading directory block <4>[ 122.381659] EXT4-fs warning (device nvme0n1p2): dx_probe:788: inode #3539533: lblock 0: comm systemd: error -5 reading directory block <3>[ 122.381728] Buffer I/O error on dev nvme0n1p2, logical block 0, lost sync page write <4>[ 122.381734] EXT4-fs warning (device nvme0n1p2): dx_probe:788: inode #3539533: lblock 0: comm systemd: error -5 reading directory block <3>[ 122.381741] EXT4-fs (nvme0n1p2): I/O error while writing superblock <0>[ 122.381744] Kernel panic - not syncing: EXT4-fs (device nvme0n1p2): panic forced after error <0>[ 122.381750] Kernel Offset: disabled <4>[ 122.381762] CPU: 2 PID: 378 Comm: rs:main Q:Reg Not tainted 5.17.0-rc8-CI-Patchwork_22617+ #1 <4>[ 122.381766] Hardware name: /NUC7i5BNB, BIOS BNKBL357.86A.0083.2020.0714.1344 07/14/2020 <4>[ 122.381771] Call Trace: <4>[ 122.381775] <4>[ 122.381777] dump_stack_lvl+0x56/0x7b <4>[ 122.381783] panic+0x12a/0x2c3 <4>[ 122.381794] ext4_handle_error.cold.167+0x13/0x13 <4>[ 122.381801] __ext4_error+0x104/0x1f0 <4>[ 122.381819] ext4_journal_check_start+0x84/0xa0 <4>[ 122.381823] __ext4_journal_start_sb+0x41/0x180 <4>[ 122.381829] ext4_dirty_inode+0x2f/0x70 <4>[ 122.381833] __mark_inode_dirty+0x181/0x580 <4>[ 122.381838] generic_update_time+0x98/0xc0 <4>[ 122.381842] file_update_time+0xc3/0x110 <4>[ 122.381844] ? generic_write_checks+0x5c/0xc0 <4>[ 122.381851] ext4_buffered_write_iter+0x4b/0x100 <4>[ 122.381858] ext4_file_write_iter+0x5a/0x830 <4>[ 122.38
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915/display: Add smem fallback allocation for dpt
Below one looks like a new issue
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/5386
igt@perf@stress-open-close - dmesg-fail - general protection fault, probably
for non-canonical address 0x6b6b6b6b6b6b6bcb, RIP: 0010:i915_oa_init_reg_state
Thanks,
Lakshmi.
-Original Message-
From: Juha-Pekka Heikkila
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 1:28 AM
To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Vudum, Lakshminarayana
Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915/display: Add smem fallback
allocation for dpt
Hi Lakshmi,
here would be again false positive on glk, glk doesn't use dpt which is changed
on my patch.
/Juha-Pekka
On 17.3.2022 4.31, Patchwork wrote:
> *Patch Details*
> *Series:* drm/i915/display: Add smem fallback allocation for dpt
> *URL:*https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/101443/
> <https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/101443/>
> *State:* failure
> *Details:*
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22588/index.html
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22588/index.html>
>
>
> CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11372_full -> Patchwork_22588_full
>
>
> Summary
>
> *FAILURE*
>
> Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_22588_full absolutely
> need to be verified manually.
>
> If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
> introduced in Patchwork_22588_full, please notify your bug team to
> allow them to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false
> positives in CI.
>
>
> Participating hosts (11 -> 12)
>
> Additional (1): shard-rkl
>
>
> Possible new issues
>
> Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in
> Patchwork_22588_full:
>
>
> IGT changes
>
>
> Possible regressions
>
> * igt@perf@stress-open-close:
> o shard-glk: NOTRUN -> DMESG-FAIL
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22588/shard-glk2/i
> gt@p...@stress-open-close.html>
>
>
> Suppressed
>
> The following results come from untrusted machines, tests, or statuses.
> They do not affect the overall result.
>
> * igt@i915_pm_dc@dc5-dpms:
> o {shard-rkl}: NOTRUN -> INCOMPLETE
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22588/shard-rkl-5/
> igt@i915_pm...@dc5-dpms.html>
>
>
> Known issues
>
> Here are the changes found in Patchwork_22588_full that come from
> known
> issues:
>
>
> IGT changes
>
>
> Issues hit
>
> *
>
> igt@gem_eio@kms:
>
> o shard-tglb: PASS
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11372/shard-tglb7/igt@gem_...@kms.html>
> -> FAIL
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22588/shard-tglb8/igt@gem_...@kms.html>
> ([i915#232])
> *
>
> igt@gem_exec_balancer@parallel-balancer:
>
> o shard-iclb: PASS
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11372/shard-iclb2/igt@gem_exec_balan...@parallel-balancer.html>
> -> SKIP
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22588/shard-iclb3/igt@gem_exec_balan...@parallel-balancer.html>
> ([i915#4525])
> *
>
> igt@gem_exec_capture@pi@rcs0:
>
> o shard-skl: PASS
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11372/shard-skl10/igt@gem_exec_capture@p...@rcs0.html>
> -> INCOMPLETE
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22588/shard-skl7/igt@gem_exec_capture@p...@rcs0.html>
> ([i915#4547])
> *
>
> igt@gem_exec_endless@dispatch@vecs0:
>
> o shard-tglb: PASS
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11372/shard-tglb6/igt@gem_exec_endless@dispa...@vecs0.html>
> -> INCOMPLETE
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22588/shard-tglb5/igt@gem_exec_endless@dispa...@vecs0.html>
> ([i915#3778])
> *
>
> igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-share@rcs0:
>
> o
>
> shard-iclb: PASS
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11372/shard-iclb2/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-sh...@rcs0.html>
> -> FAIL
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22588/shard-iclb6/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-sh...@rcs0.html>
> ([i915#2842])
>
> o
>
> shard-tglb: PASS
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11372/shard-tglb6/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for series starting with [1/2] drm/i915/ttm: limit where we apply TTM_PL_FLAG_CONTIGUOUS (rev2)
Regression on RKL is related to
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/4418
Thanks,
Lakshmi.
-Original Message-
From: Auld, Matthew
Sent: Friday, March 25, 2022 2:49 AM
To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Vudum, Lakshminarayana
Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for series starting with [1/2] drm/i915/ttm:
limit where we apply TTM_PL_FLAG_CONTIGUOUS (rev2)
On 25/03/2022 09:22, Patchwork wrote:
> *Patch Details*
> *Series:* series starting with [1/2] drm/i915/ttm: limit where we apply
> TTM_PL_FLAG_CONTIGUOUS (rev2)
> *URL:*https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/101749/
> <https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/101749/>
> *State:* failure
> *Details:*
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22677/index.html
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22677/index.html>
>
>
> CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11403 -> Patchwork_22677
>
>
> Summary
>
> *FAILURE*
>
> Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_22677 absolutely need to
> be verified manually.
>
> If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
> introduced in Patchwork_22677, please notify your bug team to allow
> them to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in
> CI.
>
> External URL:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22677/index.html
>
>
> Participating hosts (44 -> 40)
>
> Missing (4): fi-bsw-cyan shard-rkl shard-tglu fi-bdw-samus
>
>
> Possible new issues
>
> Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in
> Patchwork_22677:
>
>
> IGT changes
>
>
> Possible regressions
>
> * igt@i915_selftest@live@gt_engines:
> o fi-rkl-guc: PASS
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11403/fi-rkl-guc/igt@i915_selftest@live@gt_engines.html>
> -> INCOMPLETE
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22677/fi-rkl-guc/i
> gt@i915_selftest@live@gt_engines.html>
Unrelated fail.
>
>
> Suppressed
>
> The following results come from untrusted machines, tests, or statuses.
> They do not affect the overall result.
>
> * igt@i915_selftest@live@uncore:
> o {bat-rpls-2}: NOTRUN -> INCOMPLETE
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22677/bat-rpls-2/i
> gt@i915_selftest@l...@uncore.html>
>
>
> Known issues
>
> Here are the changes found in Patchwork_22677 that come from known issues:
>
>
> IGT changes
>
>
> Issues hit
>
> * igt@runner@aborted:
> o fi-rkl-guc: NOTRUN -> FAIL
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22677/fi-rkl-guc/igt@run...@aborted.html>
> (i915#4312
> <https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/4312>)
>
>
> Possible fixes
>
> *
>
> igt@i915_module_load@reload:
>
> o {bat-rpls-2}: DMESG-WARN
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11403/bat-rpls-2/igt@i915_module_l...@reload.html>
> (i915#4391
> <https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/4391>) -> PASS
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22677/bat-rpls-2/igt@i915_module_l...@reload.html>
> *
>
> igt@kms_pipe_crc_basic@compare-crc-sanitycheck-pipe-b:
>
> o fi-cfl-8109u: DMESG-WARN
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11403/fi-cfl-8109u/igt@kms_pipe_crc_ba...@compare-crc-sanitycheck-pipe-b.html>
> (i915#295 <https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/295>)
> -> PASS
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22677/fi-cfl-8109u/igt@kms_pipe_crc_ba...@compare-crc-sanitycheck-pipe-b.html>
> +10 similar issues
> *
>
> igt@kms_pipe_crc_basic@compare-crc-sanitycheck-pipe-c:
>
> o fi-cfl-8109u: DMESG-WARN
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11403/fi-cfl-8109u/igt@kms_pipe_crc_ba...@compare-crc-sanitycheck-pipe-c.html>
> (i915#295 <https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/295>
> / i915#5341
> <https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/5341>) -> PASS
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22677/fi-cfl-8109u
> /igt@kms_pipe_crc_ba...@compare-crc-sanitycheck-pipe-c.html>
>
> {name}: This element is suppressed. This means it is ignored when
> computing the status of the difference (SUCCESS, WARNING, or FAILURE).
>
>
> Build changes
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for Remove check for ComboPHY I/O voltage for DP source rate (rev5)
Filed a new issue and re-reported.
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/5436
igt@gem_exec_whisper@basic-fds-(forked|priority)-all - incomplete - general
protection fault, probably for non-canonical address 0x6b6b6b6b6b6b7c33
From: Nautiyal, Ankit K
Sent: Friday, March 25, 2022 2:50 AM
To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Vudum, Lakshminarayana
Subject: RE: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for Remove check for ComboPHY I/O voltage for
DP source rate (rev5)
Hello Lakshmi,
The below regressions are known issue and are not related patches:
* igt@gem_exec_whisper@basic-fds-forked-all:
* shard-kbl: NOTRUN ->
INCOMPLETE<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22655/shard-kbl1/igt@gem_exec_whis...@basic-fds-forked-all.html>
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/5268
* igt@gem_exec_whisper@basic-fds-priority-all:
* shard-skl:
PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11398/shard-skl1/igt@gem_exec_whis...@basic-fds-priority-all.html>
->
INCOMPLETE<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22655/shard-skl6/igt@gem_exec_whis...@basic-fds-priority-all.html>
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/5268
* igt@perf@enable-disable:
* shard-skl:
PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11398/shard-skl2/igt@p...@enable-disable.html>
->
FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22655/shard-skl10/igt@p...@enable-disable.html>
[https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11396/shard-skl5/igt@p...@enable-disable.html
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/1352]
Regards,
Ankit
From: Patchwork
mailto:patchw...@emeril.freedesktop.org>>
Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2022 7:40 PM
To: Nautiyal, Ankit K
mailto:ankit.k.nauti...@intel.com>>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org<mailto:intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
Subject: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for Remove check for ComboPHY I/O voltage for DP
source rate (rev5)
Patch Details
Series:
Remove check for ComboPHY I/O voltage for DP source rate (rev5)
URL:
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/96293/
State:
failure
Details:
https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22655/index.html
CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11398_full -> Patchwork_22655_full
Summary
FAILURE
Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_22655_full absolutely need to be
verified manually.
If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
introduced in Patchwork_22655_full, please notify your bug team to allow them
to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI.
Participating hosts (12 -> 12)
No changes in participating hosts
Possible new issues
Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in
Patchwork_22655_full:
IGT changes
Possible regressions
* igt@gem_exec_whisper@basic-fds-forked-all:
* shard-kbl: NOTRUN ->
INCOMPLETE<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22655/shard-kbl1/igt@gem_exec_whis...@basic-fds-forked-all.html>
* igt@gem_exec_whisper@basic-fds-priority-all:
* shard-skl:
PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11398/shard-skl1/igt@gem_exec_whis...@basic-fds-priority-all.html>
->
INCOMPLETE<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22655/shard-skl6/igt@gem_exec_whis...@basic-fds-priority-all.html>
* igt@perf@enable-disable:
* shard-skl:
PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11398/shard-skl2/igt@p...@enable-disable.html>
->
FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22655/shard-skl10/igt@p...@enable-disable.html>
Suppressed
The following results come from untrusted machines, tests, or statuses.
They do not affect the overall result.
* igt@gem_workarounds@suspend-resume-context:
* {shard-rkl}:
PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11398/shard-rkl-1/igt@gem_workarou...@suspend-resume-context.html>
->
INCOMPLETE<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22655/shard-rkl-5/igt@gem_workarou...@suspend-resume-context.html>
Known issues
Here are the changes found in Patchwork_22655_full that come from known issues:
IGT changes
Issues hit
* igt@gem_exec_balancer@parallel-balancer:
* shard-iclb:
PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11398/shard-iclb4/igt@gem_exec_balan...@parallel-balancer.html>
->
SKIP<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22655/shard-iclb5/igt@gem_exec_balan...@parallel-balancer.html>
([i915#4525])
* igt@gem_exec_capture@pi@rcs0:
* shard-skl:
PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11398/shard-skl2/igt@gem_exec_capture@p...@rcs0.html>
->
INCOMPLETE<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22655/shard-skl9/igt@gem_exec_capture@p...@rcs0.html>
([i915#4547])
* igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-deadline
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915/display: Extend DP HDR support to hsw+ (rev4)
Re-reported.
From: Shankar, Uma
Sent: Friday, March 25, 2022 3:35 AM
To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Vudum, Lakshminarayana
Subject: RE: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915/display: Extend DP HDR support
to hsw+ (rev4)
From: Patchwork
mailto:patchw...@emeril.freedesktop.org>>
Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2022 10:43 PM
To: Shankar, Uma mailto:uma.shan...@intel.com>>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org<mailto:intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
Subject: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915/display: Extend DP HDR support to
hsw+ (rev4)
Patch Details
Series:
drm/i915/display: Extend DP HDR support to hsw+ (rev4)
URL:
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/101708/
State:
failure
Details:
https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22670/index.html
CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11401_full -> Patchwork_22670_full
Summary
FAILURE
Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_22670_full absolutely need to be
verified manually.
If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
introduced in Patchwork_22670_full, please notify your bug team to allow them
to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI.
Participating hosts (11 -> 11)
No changes in participating hosts
Possible new issues
Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in
Patchwork_22670_full:
IGT changes
Possible regressions
* igt@i915_selftest@live@reset:
* shard-skl: NOTRUN ->
INCOMPLETE<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22670/shard-skl4/igt@i915_selftest@l...@reset.html>
Hi Lakshmi,
This is not related to the change, can you help report it.
Thanks & Regards,
Uma Shankar
Suppressed
The following results come from untrusted machines, tests, or statuses.
They do not affect the overall result.
* igt@kms_frontbuffer_tracking@fbc-tiling-4:
* {shard-tglu}: NOTRUN ->
SKIP<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22670/shard-tglu-2/igt@kms_frontbuffer_track...@fbc-tiling-4.html>
Known issues
Here are the changes found in Patchwork_22670_full that come from known issues:
IGT changes
Issues hit
* igt@feature_discovery@psr2:
* shard-iclb: NOTRUN ->
SKIP<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22670/shard-iclb3/igt@feature_discov...@psr2.html>
([i915#658])
* igt@gem_eio@kms:
* shard-tglb:
PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11401/shard-tglb6/igt@gem_...@kms.html>
->
FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22670/shard-tglb2/igt@gem_...@kms.html>
([i915#232])
* igt@gem_exec_balancer@parallel-balancer:
* shard-iclb:
PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11401/shard-iclb2/igt@gem_exec_balan...@parallel-balancer.html>
->
SKIP<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22670/shard-iclb6/igt@gem_exec_balan...@parallel-balancer.html>
([i915#4525])
* igt@gem_exec_balancer@parallel-contexts:
* shard-tglb: NOTRUN ->
DMESG-WARN<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22670/shard-tglb2/igt@gem_exec_balan...@parallel-contexts.html>
([i915#5076])
* igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-deadline:
* shard-skl: NOTRUN ->
FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22670/shard-skl10/igt@gem_exec_f...@basic-deadline.html>
([i915#2846])
* igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-solo@rcs0:
* shard-tglb: NOTRUN ->
FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22670/shard-tglb6/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-s...@rcs0.html>
([i915#2842])
* igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-vip@rcs0:
* shard-kbl:
PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11401/shard-kbl1/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-...@rcs0.html>
->
FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22670/shard-kbl6/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-...@rcs0.html>
([i915#2842])
* shard-iclb: NOTRUN ->
FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22670/shard-iclb3/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none-...@rcs0.html>
([i915#2842]) +2 similar issues
* igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace-share@rcs0:
* shard-tglb:
PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11401/shard-tglb8/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace-sh...@rcs0.html>
->
FAIL<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22670/shard-tglb3/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace-sh...@rcs0.html>
([i915#2842])
* igt@gem_lmem_swapping@basic:
* shard-iclb: NOTRUN ->
SKIP<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22670/shard-iclb3/igt@gem_lmem_swapp...@basic.html>
([i915#4613])
* igt@gem_lmem_swapping@parallel-multi:
* shard-kbl: NOTRUN ->
SKIP<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22670/shard-kbl3/igt@gem_lmem_swapp...@parallel-multi.html>
([fdo#109271] / [i915#4613])
* igt@gem_lmem_swapping@random
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for lmem_size modparam
Filed a new issue for the regression
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/5435
Lakshmi.
-Original Message-
From: Auld, Matthew
Sent: Friday, March 25, 2022 2:49 AM
To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Vudum, Lakshminarayana
Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for lmem_size modparam
On 24/03/2022 20:15, Patchwork wrote:
> *Patch Details*
> *Series:* lmem_size modparam
> *URL:*https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/101744/
> <https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/101744/>
> *State:* failure
> *Details:*
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22671/index.html
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22671/index.html>
>
>
> CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11402_full -> Patchwork_22671_full
>
>
> Summary
>
> *FAILURE*
>
> Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_22671_full absolutely
> need to be verified manually.
>
> If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
> introduced in Patchwork_22671_full, please notify your bug team to
> allow them to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false
> positives in CI.
>
>
> Participating hosts (11 -> 11)
>
> No changes in participating hosts
>
>
> Possible new issues
>
> Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in
> Patchwork_22671_full:
>
>
> IGT changes
>
>
> Possible regressions
>
> * igt@gem_exec_schedule@wide@vcs0:
> o shard-skl: NOTRUN -> INCOMPLETE
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22671/shard-skl2/i
> gt@gem_exec_schedule@w...@vcs0.html>
Unrelated fail.
>
>
> Suppressed
>
> The following results come from untrusted machines, tests, or statuses.
> They do not affect the overall result.
>
> * igt@kms_frontbuffer_tracking@fbc-tiling-4:
> o {shard-tglu}: NOTRUN -> SKIP
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22671/shard-tglu-2
> /igt@kms_frontbuffer_track...@fbc-tiling-4.html>
>
>
> Known issues
>
> Here are the changes found in Patchwork_22671_full that come from
> known
> issues:
>
>
> IGT changes
>
>
> Issues hit
>
> *
>
> igt@feature_discovery@psr2:
>
> o shard-iclb: NOTRUN -> SKIP
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22671/shard-iclb7/igt@feature_discov...@psr2.html>
> ([i915#658])
> *
>
> igt@gem_ctx_persistence@engines-mixed:
>
> o shard-snb: NOTRUN -> SKIP
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22671/shard-snb5/igt@gem_ctx_persiste...@engines-mixed.html>
> ([fdo#109271] / [i915#1099]) +1 similar issue
> *
>
> igt@gem_ctx_sseu@engines:
>
> o shard-tglb: NOTRUN -> SKIP
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22671/shard-tglb3/igt@gem_ctx_s...@engines.html>
> ([i915#280])
> *
>
> igt@gem_eio@in-flight-suspend:
>
> o shard-kbl: NOTRUN -> INCOMPLETE
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22671/shard-kbl4/igt@gem_...@in-flight-suspend.html>
> ([i915#3614])
> *
>
> igt@gem_eio@unwedge-stress:
>
> o shard-iclb: PASS
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11402/shard-iclb4/igt@gem_...@unwedge-stress.html>
> -> TIMEOUT
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22671/shard-iclb3/igt@gem_...@unwedge-stress.html>
> ([i915#2481] / [i915#3070])
> *
>
> igt@gem_exec_balancer@parallel-bb-first:
>
> o
>
> shard-skl: NOTRUN -> SKIP
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22671/shard-skl9/igt@gem_exec_balan...@parallel-bb-first.html>
> ([fdo#109271] / [i915#1888])
>
> o
>
> shard-tglb: NOTRUN -> DMESG-WARN
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22671/shard-tglb5/igt@gem_exec_balan...@parallel-bb-first.html>
> ([i915#5076])
>
> o
>
> shard-kbl: NOTRUN -> DMESG-WARN
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22671/shard-kbl4/igt@gem_exec_balan...@parallel-bb-first.html>
> ([i915#5076])
>
> o
>
> shard-iclb: NOTRUN -> DMESG-WARN
>
> <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22671/shard-iclb1/igt@gem_exec_balan...@parallel-bb-first.html>
> ([i915#5076])
>
> *
>
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for i915: Introduce Ponte Vecchio (rev4)
Correct, I have added GLK to this bug https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/5753 Thanks, Lakshmi. -Original Message- From: Roper, Matthew D Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2022 1:45 PM To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org Cc: Vudum, Lakshminarayana Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for i915: Introduce Ponte Vecchio (rev4) On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 07:45:28PM +, Patchwork wrote: > == Series Details == > > Series: i915: Introduce Ponte Vecchio (rev4) > URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/103443/ > State : failure > > == Summary == > > CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11632_full -> Patchwork_103443v4_full > > > Summary > --- > > **FAILURE** > > Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_103443v4_full absolutely need > to be > verified manually. > > If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes > introduced in Patchwork_103443v4_full, please notify your bug team to allow > them > to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI. > > > > Participating hosts (12 -> 11) > -- > > Missing(1): shard-rkl > > Possible new issues > --- > > Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in > Patchwork_103443v4_full: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Possible regressions > > * igt@gem_busy@close-race: > - shard-glk: [PASS][1] -> [INCOMPLETE][2] >[1]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11632/shard-glk4/igt@gem_b...@close-race.html >[2]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_103443v4/shard-glk8 > /igt@gem_b...@close-race.html Doesn't seem to be related to the PVC changes here. Maybe https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/5753 but on a different platform? Matt > > > Known issues > > > Here are the changes found in Patchwork_103443v4_full that come from known > issues: > > ### CI changes ### > > Possible fixes > > * boot: > - shard-apl: ([PASS][3], [PASS][4], [PASS][5], [PASS][6], > [PASS][7], [PASS][8], [PASS][9], [PASS][10], [PASS][11], [PASS][12], > [PASS][13], [PASS][14], [PASS][15], [PASS][16], [PASS][17], [PASS][18], > [PASS][19], [PASS][20], [PASS][21], [PASS][22], [PASS][23], [PASS][24], > [PASS][25], [FAIL][26], [PASS][27]) ([i915#4386]) -> ([PASS][28], [PASS][29], > [PASS][30], [PASS][31], [PASS][32], [PASS][33], [PASS][34], [PASS][35], > [PASS][36], [PASS][37], [PASS][38], [PASS][39], [PASS][40], [PASS][41], > [PASS][42], [PASS][43], [PASS][44], [PASS][45], [PASS][46], [PASS][47], > [PASS][48], [PASS][49], [PASS][50], [PASS][51], [PASS][52]) >[3]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11632/shard-apl8/boot.html >[4]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11632/shard-apl8/boot.html >[5]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11632/shard-apl8/boot.html >[6]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11632/shard-apl7/boot.html >[7]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11632/shard-apl7/boot.html >[8]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11632/shard-apl7/boot.html >[9]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11632/shard-apl6/boot.html >[10]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11632/shard-apl6/boot.html >[11]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11632/shard-apl6/boot.html >[12]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11632/shard-apl6/boot.html >[13]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11632/shard-apl4/boot.html >[14]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11632/shard-apl4/boot.html >[15]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11632/shard-apl4/boot.html >[16]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11632/shard-apl3/boot.html >[17]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11632/shard-apl3/boot.html >[18]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11632/shard-apl3/boot.html >[19]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11632/shard-apl3/boot.html >[20]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11632/shard-apl3/boot.html >[21]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11632/shard-apl2/boot.html >[22]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11632/shard-apl2/boot.html >[23]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11632/shard-apl2/boot.html >[24]: > https:/
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915: Media freq factor and per-gt enhancements/fixes (rev6)
I have reopened the https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/4440
igt@prime_self_import@reimport-vs-gem_close-race - fail - Failed assertion:
obj_count == 0,error: -2 != 0
"{igt@i915_pm_freq_mult@media-freq@gt0" is not yet in CI bug log.
Thanks,
Lakshmi.
-Original Message-
From: Dixit, Ashutosh
Sent: Friday, May 13, 2022 12:19 AM
To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Vudum, Lakshminarayana
Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915: Media freq factor and per-gt
enhancements/fixes (rev6)
On Thu, 12 May 2022 23:58:55 -0700, Patchwork wrote:
>
> Patch Details
>
> Series: drm/i915: Media freq factor and per-gt enhancements/fixes (rev6)
> URL: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/102665/
> State: failure
> Details:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_102665v6/index.html
>
> CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11646_full -> Patchwork_102665v6_full
>
> FAILURE
>
> Possible regressions
>
> * {igt@i915_pm_freq_mult@media-freq@gt0} (NEW):
>
> * shard-iclb: NOTRUN -> SKIP
This skip is expected, this new IGT will skip on unsupported platforms.
>
> * igt@prime_self_import@export-vs-gem_close-race:
>
> * shard-tglb: PASS -> FAIL
This failure is unrelated. It is seen here too:
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/99867/
Thanks.
--
Ashutosh
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for i915: SSEU handling updates (rev4)
Since it's bat failure, I have filed a new issue https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/6025 igt@prime_vgem@basic-fence-read - incomplete - No warnings/errors Thanks, Lakshmi. -Original Message- From: Roper, Matthew D Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2022 12:20 PM To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org Cc: Vudum, Lakshminarayana Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for i915: SSEU handling updates (rev4) On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 07:08:08PM +, Patchwork wrote: > == Series Details == > > Series: i915: SSEU handling updates (rev4) > URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/103244/ > State : failure > > == Summary == > > CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11666 -> Patchwork_103244v4 > > > Summary > --- > > **FAILURE** > > Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_103244v4 absolutely need to be > verified manually. > > If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes > introduced in Patchwork_103244v4, please notify your bug team to allow them > to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI. > > External URL: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_103244v4/index.html > > Participating hosts (41 -> 41) > -- > > Additional (1): fi-skl-guc > Missing(1): bat-rpls-2 > > Possible new issues > --- > > Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in > Patchwork_103244v4: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Possible regressions > > * igt@prime_vgem@basic-fence-read: > - fi-kbl-soraka: [PASS][1] -> [INCOMPLETE][2] >[1]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11666/fi-kbl-soraka/igt@prime_v...@basic-fence-read.html >[2]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_103244v4/fi-kbl-sor > aka/igt@prime_v...@basic-fence-read.html The results link shows 'SUCCESS' so I'm not sure why this was marked as INCOMPLETE here? Doesn't appear to be related to this series. Matt > > > Known issues > > > Here are the changes found in Patchwork_103244v4 that come from known > issues: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Issues hit > > * igt@gem_lmem_swapping@basic: > - fi-skl-guc: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][3] ([fdo#109271] / [i915#4613]) +3 > similar issues >[3]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_103244v4/fi-skl-guc > /igt@gem_lmem_swapp...@basic.html > > * igt@i915_selftest@live@execlists: > - fi-bsw-kefka: [PASS][4] -> [INCOMPLETE][5] ([i915#2940] / > [i915#5801]) >[4]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11666/fi-bsw-kefka/igt@i915_selftest@l...@execlists.html >[5]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_103244v4/fi-bsw-kef > ka/igt@i915_selftest@l...@execlists.html > > * igt@i915_selftest@live@gem: > - fi-pnv-d510:NOTRUN -> [DMESG-FAIL][6] ([i915#4528]) >[6]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_103244v4/fi-pnv-d51 > 0/igt@i915_selftest@l...@gem.html > > * igt@i915_selftest@live@hangcheck: > - fi-snb-2600:[PASS][7] -> [INCOMPLETE][8] ([i915#3921]) >[7]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11666/fi-snb-2600/igt@i915_selftest@l...@hangcheck.html >[8]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_103244v4/fi-snb-260 > 0/igt@i915_selftest@l...@hangcheck.html > > * igt@kms_chamelium@dp-crc-fast: > - fi-skl-guc: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][9] ([fdo#109271] / [fdo#111827]) > +8 similar issues >[9]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_103244v4/fi-skl-guc > /igt@kms_chamel...@dp-crc-fast.html > > * igt@kms_cursor_legacy@basic-busy-flip-before-cursor-atomic: > - fi-skl-guc: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][10] ([fdo#109271]) +11 similar > issues >[10]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_103244v4/fi-skl-guc > /igt@kms_cursor_leg...@basic-busy-flip-before-cursor-atomic.html > > * igt@kms_pipe_crc_basic@compare-crc-sanitycheck-pipe-d: > - fi-skl-guc: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][11] ([fdo#109271] / [i915#533]) >[11]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_103244v4/fi-skl-guc > /igt@kms_pipe_crc_ba...@compare-crc-sanitycheck-pipe-d.html > > * igt@runner@aborted: > - fi-bsw-kefka: NOTRUN -> [FAIL][12] ([fdo#109271] / [i915#3428] / > [i915#4312]) >[12]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_103244v4/fi-bsw-kef > ka/igt@run...@aborted.html > > > Poss
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for i915: SSEU handling updates (rev4)
Filed a new issue https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/6038 igt@kms_flip@flip-vs-panning-interruptible@c-edp1 - dmesg-warn - rcu: INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks Thanks, Lakshmi. -Original Message- From: Roper, Matthew D Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2022 8:24 PM To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org Cc: Vudum, Lakshminarayana Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for i915: SSEU handling updates (rev4) On Wed, May 18, 2022 at 12:34:11AM +, Patchwork wrote: > == Series Details == > > Series: i915: SSEU handling updates (rev4) > URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/103244/ > State : failure > > == Summary == > > CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11666_full -> Patchwork_103244v4_full > > > Summary > --- > > **FAILURE** > > Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_103244v4_full absolutely need > to be > verified manually. > > If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes > introduced in Patchwork_103244v4_full, please notify your bug team to allow > them > to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI. > > > > Participating hosts (11 -> 11) > -- > > No changes in participating hosts > > Possible new issues > --- > > Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in > Patchwork_103244v4_full: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Possible regressions > > * igt@kms_flip@flip-vs-panning-interruptible@c-edp1: > - shard-iclb: [PASS][1] -> [DMESG-WARN][2] >[1]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11666/shard-iclb3/igt@kms_flip@flip-vs-panning-interrupti...@c-edp1.html >[2]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_103244v4/shard-iclb8/igt@kms_flip@flip-vs-panning-interrupti...@c-edp1.html <3> [607.307030] rcu: INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks: <3> [607.307121] rcu: 3-...!: (159 GPs behind) idle=834/0/0x0 softirq=27765/27765 fqs=1 (false positive?) <3> [607.307825] rcu: 7-...!: (172 GPs behind) idle=abc/0/0x0 softirq=23642/23643 fqs=1 (false positive?) <4> [607.307934](detected by 0, t=65002 jiffies, g=64137, q=5840) <6> [607.307942] Sending NMI from CPU 0 to CPUs 3: <4> [607.308032] NMI backtrace for cpu 3 skipped: idling at intel_idle+0x67/0xc0 <6> [607.308950] Sending NMI from CPU 0 to CPUs 7: <4> [607.309045] NMI backtrace for cpu 7 skipped: idling at intel_idle+0x67/0xc0 <3> [607.309957] rcu: rcu_preempt kthread timer wakeup didn't happen for 64995 jiffies! g64137 f0x0 RCU_GP_WAIT_FQS(5) ->state=0x402 <3> [607.310053] rcu: Possible timer handling issue on cpu=3 timer-softirq=16787 <3> [607.310110] rcu: rcu_preempt kthread starved for 64998 jiffies! g64137 f0x0 RCU_GP_WAIT_FQS(5) ->state=0x402 ->cpu=3 <3> [607.310195] rcu: Unless rcu_preempt kthread gets sufficient CPU time, OOM is now expected behavior. <3> [607.310267] rcu: RCU grace-period kthread stack dump: <6> [607.310310] task:rcu_preempt state:I stack:14472 pid: 13 ppid: 2 flags:0x4000 <6> [607.310326] Call Trace: <6> [607.310330] <6> [607.310339] __schedule+0x483/0xb50 <6> [607.310353] ? schedule_timeout+0x1b9/0x2e0 <6> [607.310367] schedule+0x3f/0xa0 <6> [607.310376] schedule_timeout+0x1be/0x2e0 <6> [607.310386] ? del_timer_sync+0xb0/0xb0 <6> [607.310398] ? 0x8100 <6> [607.310408] ? rcu_gp_cleanup+0x440/0x440 <6> [607.310413] rcu_gp_fqs_loop+0x273/0x3b0 <6> [607.310427] rcu_gp_kthread+0xb8/0x120 <6> [607.310436] kthread+0xed/0x120 <6> [607.310443] ? kthread_complete_and_exit+0x20/0x20 <6> [607.310452] ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30 <6> [607.310478] <3> [607.310481] rcu: Stack dump where RCU GP kthread last ran: <6> [607.310527] Sending NMI from CPU 0 to CPUs 3: <4> [607.310602] NMI backtrace for cpu 3 skipped: idling at intel_idle+0x67/0xc0 It's not clear what this is from (no indication it's even related to the graphics driver). Definitely not the kind of thing that the SSEU rework in this series could cause to happen during a display test. Matt > > > Known issues > > > Here are the changes found in Patchwork_103244v4_full that come from known > issues: > > ### CI changes ### > > Possible fixes > > * boot: > - shard-skl: ([PASS][3], [PASS][4], [PASS][5], [PASS][6], > [PASS][7], [PASS][8], [PASS][9], [PASS][10], [PASS][11], [PASS][12], > [PASS][13], [PASS][14], [PASS][15], [PASS][16], [PASS][17], [PASS][18]
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/dg2: Enable DC5
Issue is part of https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/4890.
Filter is updated to include all tests.
Lakshmi.
-Original Message-
From: Roper, Matthew D
Sent: Friday, May 20, 2022 4:11 PM
To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: Srivatsa, Anusha ; Vudum, Lakshminarayana
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/dg2: Enable DC5
On Fri, May 20, 2022 at 05:11:22PM +, Patchwork wrote:
> == Series Details ==
>
> Series: drm/i915/dg2: Enable DC5
> URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/104233/
> State : failure
>
> == Summary ==
>
> CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11681 -> Patchwork_104233v1
>
>
> Summary
> ---
>
> **FAILURE**
>
> Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_104233v1 absolutely need to be
> verified manually.
>
> If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
> introduced in Patchwork_104233v1, please notify your bug team to allow them
> to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI.
>
> External URL:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_104233v1/index.html
>
> Participating hosts (46 -> 44)
> --
>
> Missing(2): bat-dg2-8 fi-rkl-11600
>
> Possible new issues
> ---
>
> Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in
> Patchwork_104233v1:
>
> ### IGT changes ###
>
> Possible regressions
>
> * igt@fbdev@read:
> - fi-icl-u2: [PASS][1] -> [DMESG-WARN][2]
>[1]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11681/fi-icl-u2/igt@fb...@read.html
>[2]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_104233v1/fi-icl-u2/
> igt@fb...@read.html
It looks like this is an error coming from a bluetooth driver, not related to
graphics:
<3> [26.916574] Bluetooth: hci0: Reading Intel version command failed (-110)
<4> [26.916689] general protection fault, probably for non-canonical address
0x6b6b6b6b6b6b6b6b: [#1] PREEMPT SMP NOPTI
<4> [26.916726] CPU: 2 PID: 99 Comm: kworker/2:2 Not tainted
5.18.0-rc7-Patchwork_104233v1-gba369855d857+ #1
<4> [26.916731] Hardware name: Intel Corporation Ice Lake Client
Platform/IceLake U DDR4 SODIMM PD RVP TLC, BIOS
ICLSFWR1.R00.3183.A00.1905020411 05/02/2019
<4> [26.916737] Workqueue: events hci_cmd_timeout [bluetooth]
<4> [26.916755] RIP: 0010:hci_cmd_timeout+0x30/0xa0 [bluetooth]
<4> [26.916806] Code: ff ff 53 48 8b 87 10 05 00 00 48 89 fb 48 85 c0 74 63
48 8b 80 b8 00 00 00 48 8d b5 a0 00 00 00 48 85 ed 48 c7 c7 c8 6c 38 a0 <0f> b7
10 48 c7 c0 53 38 38 a0 48 0f 44 f0 e8 91 13 06 00 48 8b 83
<4> [26.916814] RSP: 0018:c9ae3e50 EFLAGS: 00010286
<4> [26.916818] RAX: 6b6b6b6b6b6b6b6b RBX: 88810ef5aac8 RCX:
<4> [26.916821] RDX: 0001 RSI: 88810ef5a0a0 RDI:
a0386cc8
<4> [26.916825] RBP: 88810ef5a000 R08: 88810700ba38 R09:
fffe
<4> [26.916828] R10: 0001 R11: dfbbfb17 R12:
88849fb3afc0
<4> [26.916832] R13: 88849fb3fc00 R14: R15:
88849fb3fc05
<4> [26.916835] FS: () GS:88849fb0()
knlGS:
<4> [26.916839] CS: 0010 DS: ES: CR0: 80050033
<4> [26.916842] CR2: 7fcc6837e1a0 CR3: 06612006 CR4:
00770ee0
<4> [26.916846] PKRU: 5554
<4> [26.916848] Call Trace:
<4> [26.916850]
<4> [26.916852] process_one_work+0x272/0x5c0
<4> [26.916857] worker_thread+0x37/0x370
<4> [26.916861] ? process_one_work+0x5c0/0x5c0
<4> [26.916864] kthread+0xed/0x120
<4> [26.916867] ? kthread_complete_and_exit+0x20/0x20
<4> [26.916870] ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30
<4> [26.916875]
Looks like this might be
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/4890 ?
>
>
> Suppressed
>
> The following results come from untrusted machines, tests, or statuses.
> They do not affect the overall result.
>
> * igt@kms_busy@basic@modeset:
> - {bat-dg2-9}:[PASS][3] -> [DMESG-WARN][4]
>[3]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11681/bat-dg2-9/igt@kms_busy@ba...@modeset.html
>[4]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_104233v1/bat-dg2-9/
> igt@kms_busy@ba...@modeset.html
>
>
> Known issues
>
>
> Here are the changes found in Patchwork_104233v1 that come from known
> issues:
>
> ### IGT changes ###
>
> Issues hit
>
>
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/dg2: Enable DC5
I don't see any regressions from Bat but on shards. https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_104233v1/shard-skl8/igt@i915_pm...@dc5-dpms.html is mapped to https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/5961 Thanks, Lakshmi. -Original Message- From: Srivatsa, Anusha Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2022 9:13 AM To: Roper, Matthew D ; intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Vudum, Lakshminarayana Subject: RE: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/dg2: Enable DC5 > -Original Message- > From: Roper, Matthew D > Sent: Friday, May 20, 2022 4:11 PM > To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > Cc: Srivatsa, Anusha ; Vudum, > Lakshminarayana > Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/dg2: Enable > DC5 > > On Fri, May 20, 2022 at 05:11:22PM +, Patchwork wrote: > > == Series Details == > > > > Series: drm/i915/dg2: Enable DC5 > > URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/104233/ > > State : failure > > > > == Summary == > > > > CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11681 -> Patchwork_104233v1 > > > > > > Summary > > --- > > > > **FAILURE** > > > > Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_104233v1 absolutely > need to be > > verified manually. > > > > If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes > > introduced in Patchwork_104233v1, please notify your bug team to > > allow > them > > to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in > > CI. > > > > External URL: > > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_104233v1/index.ht > > ml > > > > Participating hosts (46 -> 44) > > -- > > > > Missing(2): bat-dg2-8 fi-rkl-11600 > > > > Possible new issues > > --- > > > > Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in > Patchwork_104233v1: > > > > ### IGT changes ### > > > > Possible regressions > > > > * igt@fbdev@read: > > - fi-icl-u2: [PASS][1] -> [DMESG-WARN][2] > >[1]: > > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11681/fi-icl- > u2/igt@fb...@read.html > >[2]: > > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_104233v1/fi-icl-u > > 2/ > > igt@fb...@read.html > > It looks like this is an error coming from a bluetooth driver, not > related to > graphics: > ><3> [26.916574] Bluetooth: hci0: Reading Intel version command > failed (- > 110) ><4> [26.916689] general protection fault, probably for > non-canonical address 0x6b6b6b6b6b6b6b6b: [#1] PREEMPT SMP NOPTI ><4> [26.916726] CPU: 2 PID: 99 Comm: kworker/2:2 Not tainted > 5.18.0-rc7- Patchwork_104233v1-gba369855d857+ #1 ><4> [26.916731] Hardware name: Intel Corporation Ice Lake Client > Platform/IceLake U DDR4 SODIMM PD RVP TLC, BIOS > ICLSFWR1.R00.3183.A00.1905020411 05/02/2019 ><4> [26.916737] Workqueue: events hci_cmd_timeout [bluetooth] ><4> [26.916755] RIP: 0010:hci_cmd_timeout+0x30/0xa0 [bluetooth] ><4> [26.916806] Code: ff ff 53 48 8b 87 10 05 00 00 48 89 fb 48 85 > c0 74 63 > 48 8b 80 b8 00 00 00 48 8d b5 a0 00 00 00 48 85 ed 48 c7 c7 c8 6c 38 > a0 <0f> > b7 10 48 c7 c0 53 38 38 a0 48 0f 44 f0 e8 91 13 06 00 48 8b 83 ><4> [26.916814] RSP: 0018:c9ae3e50 EFLAGS: 00010286 ><4> [26.916818] RAX: 6b6b6b6b6b6b6b6b RBX: 88810ef5aac8 RCX: > ><4> [26.916821] RDX: 0001 RSI: 88810ef5a0a0 RDI: > a0386cc8 ><4> [26.916825] RBP: 88810ef5a000 R08: 88810700ba38 R09: > fffe ><4> [26.916828] R10: 0001 R11: dfbbfb17 R12: > 88849fb3afc0 ><4> [26.916832] R13: 88849fb3fc00 R14: R15: > 88849fb3fc05 ><4> [26.916835] FS: () > GS:88849fb0() > knlGS: ><4> [26.916839] CS: 0010 DS: ES: CR0: 80050033 ><4> [26.916842] CR2: 7fcc6837e1a0 CR3: 06612006 CR4: > 00770ee0 ><4> [26.916846] PKRU: 5554 ><4> [26.916848] Call Trace: ><4> [26.916850] ><4> [26.916852] process_one_work+0x272/0x5c0 ><4> [26.916857] worker_thread+0x37/0x370 ><4> [26.916861] ? process_one_work+0x5c0/0x5c0 ><4> [26.916864] kthread+0xed/0x120 ><4> [26.916867] ? kthread
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for i915: SSEU handling updates (rev2)
CI: boot test failure seems to fail always in the same manner. https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/6074 BDW: CI:Boot - fail - No warnings/errors I believe the shards failures is unrelated (as there no logs) to this patch. So I created a generic bug for GEN9 to track of failures that doesn't have logs. This bug will be reviewed weekly by the team. https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_104244v2/shard-skl3/igt@i915_selftest@l...@dmabuf.html https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/6075 Thanks, Lakshmi. -Original Message- From: Roper, Matthew D Sent: Monday, May 23, 2022 4:32 PM To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org Cc: Vudum, Lakshminarayana Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for i915: SSEU handling updates (rev2) On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 09:23:33PM +, Patchwork wrote: > == Series Details == > > Series: i915: SSEU handling updates (rev2) > URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/104244/ > State : failure > > == Summary == > > CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11693 -> Patchwork_104244v2 > > > Summary > --- > > **FAILURE** > > Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_104244v2 absolutely need to be > verified manually. > > If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes > introduced in Patchwork_104244v2, please notify your bug team to allow them > to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI. > > External URL: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_104244v2/index.html > > Participating hosts (44 -> 45) > -- > > Additional (2): fi-icl-u2 fi-tgl-u2 > Missing(1): fi-hsw-4770 > > Possible new issues > --- > > Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in > Patchwork_104244v2: > > ### CI changes ### > > Possible regressions > > * boot: > - fi-bdw-5557u: [PASS][1] -> [FAIL][2] >[1]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11693/fi-bdw-5557u/boot.html >[2]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_104244v2/fi-bdw-555 > 7u/boot.html I don't see a boot failure here? It looks like i915 loaded successfully, without errors. It also looks like more tests ran successfully on the machine after that as well. Matt > > > Known issues > > > Here are the changes found in Patchwork_104244v2 that come from known > issues: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Issues hit > > * igt@gem_exec_gttfill@basic: > - fi-icl-u2: NOTRUN -> [INCOMPLETE][3] ([i915#4890]) >[3]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_104244v2/fi-icl-u2/ > igt@gem_exec_gttf...@basic.html > > * igt@gem_huc_copy@huc-copy: > - fi-tgl-u2: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][4] ([i915#2190]) >[4]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_104244v2/fi-tgl-u2/ > igt@gem_huc_c...@huc-copy.html > > * igt@i915_selftest@live@hangcheck: > - bat-dg1-6: [PASS][5] -> [DMESG-FAIL][6] ([i915#4494] / > [i915#4957]) >[5]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11693/bat-dg1-6/igt@i915_selftest@l...@hangcheck.html >[6]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_104244v2/bat-dg1-6/igt@i915_selftest@l...@hangcheck.html > - fi-snb-2600:[PASS][7] -> [INCOMPLETE][8] ([i915#3921]) >[7]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11693/fi-snb-2600/igt@i915_selftest@l...@hangcheck.html >[8]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_104244v2/fi-snb-260 > 0/igt@i915_selftest@l...@hangcheck.html > > * igt@kms_busy@basic@flip: > - fi-tgl-u2: NOTRUN -> [DMESG-WARN][9] ([i915#402]) +3 similar > issues >[9]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_104244v2/fi-tgl-u2/ > igt@kms_busy@ba...@flip.html > > * igt@kms_chamelium@dp-hpd-fast: > - fi-tgl-u2: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][10] ([fdo#109284] / [fdo#111827]) > +7 similar issues >[10]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_104244v2/fi-tgl-u2/ > igt@kms_chamel...@dp-hpd-fast.html > > * igt@kms_cursor_legacy@basic-busy-flip-before-cursor-atomic: > - fi-tgl-u2: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][11] ([i915#4103]) +1 similar issue >[11]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_104244v2/fi-tgl-u2/ > igt@kms_cursor_leg...@basic-busy-flip-before-cursor-atomic.html > > * igt@kms_flip@basic-flip-vs-modeset@b-edp1: > - bat-adlp-4: [PASS][12] -> [DMESG-WARN][13] ([i915#3576]) >[1
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915/hwconfig: Future-proof platform checks
Filed a new issue https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/6086
igt@kms_atomic_transition@modeset-transition-nonblocking-fencing@1x-outputs -
incomplete - No warnings/errors
Thanks,
Lakshmi.
-Original Message-
From: Roper, Matthew D
Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2022 8:23 AM
To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: Vudum, Lakshminarayana
Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915/hwconfig: Future-proof platform
checks
On Wed, May 25, 2022 at 06:41:11AM +, Patchwork wrote:
> == Series Details ==
>
> Series: drm/i915/hwconfig: Future-proof platform checks
> URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/104338/
> State : failure
>
> == Summary ==
>
> CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11696_full -> Patchwork_104338v1_full
>
>
> Summary
> ---
>
> **FAILURE**
>
> Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_104338v1_full absolutely need
> to be
> verified manually.
>
> If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
> introduced in Patchwork_104338v1_full, please notify your bug team to allow
> them
> to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI.
>
>
>
> Participating hosts (13 -> 13)
> --
>
> No changes in participating hosts
>
> Possible new issues
> ---
>
> Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in
> Patchwork_104338v1_full:
>
> ### IGT changes ###
>
> Possible regressions
>
> *
> igt@kms_atomic_transition@modeset-transition-nonblocking-fencing@1x-outputs:
> - shard-tglb: [PASS][1] -> [INCOMPLETE][2]
>[1]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11696/shard-tglb3/igt@kms_atomic_transition@modeset-transition-nonblocking-fenc...@1x-outputs.html
>[2]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_104338v1/shard-tglb
> 8/igt@kms_atomic_transition@modeset-transition-nonblocking-fencing@1x-
> outputs.html
Unexpected incomplete; not errors in the log before the machine/network
disappeared. Not related to this series.
Matt
>
>
> Suppressed
>
> The following results come from untrusted machines, tests, or statuses.
> They do not affect the overall result.
>
> * igt@kms_color@pipe-a-deep-color:
> - {shard-rkl}:[SKIP][3] ([i915#4070] / [i915#4098]) ->
> [INCOMPLETE][4]
>[3]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11696/shard-rkl-2/igt@kms_co...@pipe-a-deep-color.html
>[4]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_104338v1/shard-rkl-
> 6/igt@kms_co...@pipe-a-deep-color.html
>
> *
> {igt@kms_plane_scaling@plane-downscale-with-modifiers-factor-0-25@pipe-a-edp-1}:
> - shard-tglb: [SKIP][5] ([i915#5176]) -> [SKIP][6] +19 similar
> issues
>[5]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11696/shard-tglb7/igt@kms_plane_scaling@plane-downscale-with-modifiers-factor-0...@pipe-a-edp-1.html
>[6]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_104338v1/shard-tglb
> 5/igt@kms_plane_scaling@plane-downscale-with-modifiers-factor-0-25@pip
> e-a-edp-1.html
>
> *
> {igt@kms_plane_scaling@plane-downscale-with-modifiers-factor-0-5@pipe-a-edp-1}:
> - shard-iclb: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][7] +2 similar issues
>[7]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_104338v1/shard-iclb
> 6/igt@kms_plane_scaling@plane-downscale-with-modifiers-factor-0-5@pipe
> -a-edp-1.html
>
> *
> {igt@kms_plane_scaling@plane-downscale-with-rotation-factor-0-75@pipe-a-edp-1}:
> - shard-iclb: [SKIP][8] ([i915#5176]) -> [SKIP][9] +17 similar
> issues
>[8]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11696/shard-iclb8/igt@kms_plane_scaling@plane-downscale-with-rotation-factor-0...@pipe-a-edp-1.html
>[9]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_104338v1/shard-iclb
> 3/igt@kms_plane_scaling@plane-downscale-with-rotation-factor-0-75@pipe
> -a-edp-1.html
>
> * {igt@kms_plane_scaling@plane-upscale-with-rotation-20x20@pipe-a-edp-1}:
> - {shard-rkl}:NOTRUN -> [SKIP][10] +4 similar issues
>[10]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_104338v1/shard-rkl-
> 6/igt@kms_plane_scaling@plane-upscale-with-rotation-20x20@pipe-a-edp-1
> .html
>
> * {igt@kms_plane_scaling@plane-upscale-with-rotation-20x20@pipe-d-hdmi-a-1}:
> - {shard-tglu}: [SKIP][11] ([i915#5176]) -> [SKIP][12] +15 similar
> issues
>[11]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11696/shard-tglu-5/igt@kms_plane_scaling@plane-upscale-with-rotati
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915/hwconfig: Report no hwconfig support on ADL-N
Filed a new issue https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/6085
igt@kms_cursor_crc@pipe-a-cursor-256x256-sliding - incomplete - No
warnings/errors
Thanks,
Lakshmi.
-Original Message-
From: Roper, Matthew D
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 4:56 PM
To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: Vivekanandan, Balasubramani ; Vudum,
Lakshminarayana
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915/hwconfig: Report no
hwconfig support on ADL-N
On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 08:16:36PM +, Patchwork wrote:
> == Series Details ==
>
> Series: drm/i915/hwconfig: Report no hwconfig support on ADL-N
> URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/104270/
> State : failure
>
> == Summary ==
>
> CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11690_full -> Patchwork_104270v1_full
>
>
> Summary
> ---
>
> **FAILURE**
>
> Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_104270v1_full absolutely need
> to be
> verified manually.
>
> If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
> introduced in Patchwork_104270v1_full, please notify your bug team to allow
> them
> to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI.
>
>
>
> Participating hosts (13 -> 12)
> --
>
> Missing(1): shard-rkl
>
> Possible new issues
> ---
>
> Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in
> Patchwork_104270v1_full:
>
> ### IGT changes ###
>
> Possible regressions
>
> * igt@kms_cursor_crc@pipe-a-cursor-256x256-sliding:
> - shard-tglb: [PASS][1] -> [INCOMPLETE][2]
>[1]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11690/shard-tglb1/igt@kms_cursor_...@pipe-a-cursor-256x256-sliding.html
>[2]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_104270v1/shard-tglb
> 8/igt@kms_cursor_...@pipe-a-cursor-256x256-sliding.html
Seems like the machine or network died; the logs just cut off with no
indication of a problem before that point. And ADL-N hwconfig change wouldn't
impact the behavior of a TGL display test, so not related to Bala's patch here.
Patch applied to drm-intel-gt-next. Thanks for the patch.
Matt
>
>
> Suppressed
>
> The following results come from untrusted machines, tests, or statuses.
> They do not affect the overall result.
>
> * {igt@kms_hdr@bpc-switch@pipe-a-hdmi-a-1}:
> - {shard-dg1}:NOTRUN -> [SKIP][3]
>[3]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_104270v1/shard-dg1-
> 16/igt@kms_hdr@bpc-swi...@pipe-a-hdmi-a-1.html
>
>
> New tests
> -
>
> New tests have been introduced between CI_DRM_11690_full and
> Patchwork_104270v1_full:
>
> ### New IGT tests (7) ###
>
> * igt@gem_busy@parallel:
> - Statuses :
> - Exec time: [None] s
>
> * igt@kms_flip@modeset-vs-vblank-race@a-dp1:
> - Statuses : 2 pass(s)
> - Exec time: [4.03, 4.20] s
>
> * igt@kms_flip@modeset-vs-vblank-race@b-dp1:
> - Statuses : 2 pass(s)
> - Exec time: [3.92, 4.06] s
>
> * igt@kms_flip@modeset-vs-vblank-race@c-dp1:
> - Statuses : 2 pass(s)
> - Exec time: [3.99, 4.11] s
>
> * igt@kms_flip@plain-flip-fb-recreate-interruptible@c-edp1:
> - Statuses : 1 pass(s)
> - Exec time: [11.53] s
>
> * igt@perf_pmu@busy-accuracy-2:
> - Statuses :
> - Exec time: [None] s
>
> * igt@perf_pmu@most-busy-idle-check-all:
> - Statuses :
> - Exec time: [None] s
>
>
>
> Known issues
>
>
> Here are the changes found in Patchwork_104270v1_full that come from known
> issues:
>
> ### IGT changes ###
>
> Issues hit
>
> * igt@feature_discovery@display-2x:
> - shard-iclb: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][4] ([i915#1839])
>[4]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_104270v1/shard-iclb
> 5/igt@feature_discov...@display-2x.html
>
> * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-deadline:
> - shard-kbl: NOTRUN -> [FAIL][5] ([i915#2846])
>[5]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_104270v1/shard-kbl6/igt@gem_exec_f...@basic-deadline.html
> - shard-apl: NOTRUN -> [FAIL][6] ([i915#2846])
>[6]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_104270v1/shard-apl2
> /igt@gem_exec_f...@basic-deadline.html
>
> * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none@vecs0:
> - shard-apl: [PASS][7] -> [FAIL][8] ([i915#2842]) +1 similar
> issue
>[7]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11690/shard-apl6
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/display/adlp: More updates to voltage swing table
Failure is associated to the GEN9 generic bug and re-reported.
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/6075
[GEN9 only] Few tests - No logs
Thanks,
Lakshmi.
-Original Message-
From: Roper, Matthew D
Sent: Thursday, June 2, 2022 10:16 AM
To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: Vivekanandan, Balasubramani ; Vudum,
Lakshminarayana
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/display/adlp: More
updates to voltage swing table
On Thu, Jun 02, 2022 at 04:31:23PM +, Patchwork wrote:
> == Series Details ==
>
> Series: drm/i915/display/adlp: More updates to voltage swing table
> URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/104661/
> State : failure
>
> == Summary ==
>
> CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11719 -> Patchwork_104661v1
>
>
> Summary
> ---
>
> **FAILURE**
>
> Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_104661v1 absolutely need to be
> verified manually.
>
> If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
> introduced in Patchwork_104661v1, please notify your bug team to allow them
> to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI.
>
> External URL:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_104661v1/index.html
>
> Participating hosts (47 -> 43)
> --
>
> Additional (2): bat-atsm-1 fi-tgl-u2
> Missing(6): fi-hsw-4200u bat-adlm-1 fi-icl-u2 fi-bwr-2160 bat-jsl-2
> fi-bdw-samus
>
> Possible new issues
> ---
>
> Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in
> Patchwork_104661v1:
>
> ### IGT changes ###
>
> Possible regressions
>
> * igt@gem_softpin@allocator-basic-reserve:
> - fi-kbl-soraka: [PASS][1] -> [INCOMPLETE][2]
>[1]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11719/fi-kbl-soraka/igt@gem_soft...@allocator-basic-reserve.html
>[2]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_104661v1/fi-kbl-sor
> aka/igt@gem_soft...@allocator-basic-reserve.html
From the log it appears this test did complete successfully. I'm not sure why
CI marked it as an INCOMPLETE? Either way, Bala's patch here would not have
changed the behavior for a KBL platform.
Matt
>
>
> Suppressed
>
> The following results come from untrusted machines, tests, or statuses.
> They do not affect the overall result.
>
> * igt@kms_flip@basic-flip-vs-wf_vblank:
> - {bat-atsm-1}: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][3] +4 similar issues
>[3]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_104661v1/bat-atsm-1
> /igt@kms_flip@basic-flip-vs-wf_vblank.html
>
>
> Known issues
>
>
> Here are the changes found in Patchwork_104661v1 that come from known
> issues:
>
> ### IGT changes ###
>
> Issues hit
>
> * igt@gem_huc_copy@huc-copy:
> - fi-tgl-u2: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][4] ([i915#2190])
>[4]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_104661v1/fi-tgl-u2/
> igt@gem_huc_c...@huc-copy.html
>
> * igt@i915_selftest@live@gt_engines:
> - bat-dg1-6: [PASS][5] -> [INCOMPLETE][6] ([i915#4418])
>[5]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11719/bat-dg1-6/igt@i915_selftest@live@gt_engines.html
>[6]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_104661v1/bat-dg1-6/
> igt@i915_selftest@live@gt_engines.html
>
> * igt@i915_selftest@live@hangcheck:
> - fi-bdw-5557u: NOTRUN -> [INCOMPLETE][7] ([i915#3921])
>[7]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_104661v1/fi-bdw-555
> 7u/igt@i915_selftest@l...@hangcheck.html
>
> * igt@kms_chamelium@common-hpd-after-suspend:
> - fi-hsw-4770:NOTRUN -> [SKIP][8] ([fdo#109271] / [fdo#111827])
>[8]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_104661v1/fi-hsw-4770/igt@kms_chamel...@common-hpd-after-suspend.html
> - fi-cfl-8109u: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][9] ([fdo#109271] / [fdo#111827])
>[9]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_104661v1/fi-cfl-810
> 9u/igt@kms_chamel...@common-hpd-after-suspend.html
>
> * igt@kms_chamelium@hdmi-edid-read:
> - fi-tgl-u2: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][10] ([fdo#109284] / [fdo#111827])
> +7 similar issues
>[10]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_104661v1/fi-tgl-u2/
> igt@kms_chamel...@hdmi-edid-read.html
>
> * igt@kms_cursor_legacy@basic-busy-flip-before-cursor-legacy:
> - fi-tgl-u2: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][11] ([i915#4103]) +1 similar issue
>[11]:
> https://intel
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.SPARSE: warning for drm/i915: More PVC+DG2 workarounds
No Idea about that Matt. I have never did that. Lakshmi. -Original Message- From: Roper, Matthew D Sent: Tuesday, June 7, 2022 9:43 PM To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org Cc: Vudum, Lakshminarayana Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.SPARSE: warning for drm/i915: More PVC+DG2 workarounds On Wed, Jun 08, 2022 at 02:38:12AM +, Patchwork wrote: > == Series Details == > > Series: drm/i915: More PVC+DG2 workarounds > URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/104866/ > State : warning > > == Summary == > > Error: dim sparse failed > Sparse version: v0.6.2 > Fast mode used, each commit won't be checked separately. > @Lakshmi, is there any way to get more details out of these Sparse results that pop up sometimes? When I run "dim sparse" locally (both with and without --fast) I get success: Sparse version: 0.6.4 Commit: drm/i915: More PVC+DG2 workarounds Okay! and if I do it manually with "make C=1" I just see the handful of pre-existing / expected warnings, nothing new from this patch. Any ideas what could be going on here? Maybe some quirk of the older v0.6.2 version CI is running? Matt > -- Matt Roper Graphics Software Engineer VTT-OSGC Platform Enablement Intel Corporation
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for series starting with [1/2] drm/i915/dg2: Add Wa_15010599737
Re-reproted.
-Original Message-
From: Roper, Matthew D
Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2022 8:55 AM
To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: Vudum, Lakshminarayana
Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for series starting with [1/2] drm/i915/dg2:
Add Wa_15010599737
On Sat, Jul 09, 2022 at 07:41:45AM +, Patchwork wrote:
> == Series Details ==
>
> Series: series starting with [1/2] drm/i915/dg2: Add Wa_15010599737
> URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/106130/
> State : failure
>
> == Summary ==
>
> CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11862_full -> Patchwork_106130v1_full
>
>
> Summary
> ---
>
> **FAILURE**
>
> Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_106130v1_full absolutely need
> to be
> verified manually.
>
> If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
> introduced in Patchwork_106130v1_full, please notify your bug team to allow
> them
> to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI.
>
>
>
> Participating hosts (10 -> 13)
> --
>
> Additional (3): shard-rkl shard-dg1 shard-tglu
>
> Possible new issues
> ---
>
> Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in
> Patchwork_106130v1_full:
>
> ### IGT changes ###
>
> Possible regressions
>
> * igt@kms_frontbuffer_tracking@fbcpsr-1p-indfb-fliptrack-mmap-gtt:
> - shard-tglb: [PASS][1] -> [FAIL][2] +2 similar issues
>[1]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11862/shard-tglb7/igt@kms_frontbuffer_track...@fbcpsr-1p-indfb-fliptrack-mmap-gtt.html
>[2]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_106130v1/shard-tglb3/igt@kms_frontbuffer_track...@fbcpsr-1p-indfb-fliptrack-mmap-gtt.html
This is an expected regression in functionality due to the new
restrictions imposed by the workaround: the test now fails because
FBC is turned off whenever PSR1 is active. However that's exactly
what the workaround asks us to do (in order to avoid incorrect hardware
behavior).
>
> * igt@kms_invalid_mode@clock-too-high@edp-1-pipe-d:
> - shard-tglb: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][3] +3 similar issues
>[3]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_106130v1/shard-tglb1/igt@kms_invalid_mode@clock-too-h...@edp-1-pipe-d.html
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/6403
Matt
>
>
> Suppressed
>
> The following results come from untrusted machines, tests, or statuses.
> They do not affect the overall result.
>
> * igt@kms_frontbuffer_tracking@fbcpsr-1p-primscrn-spr-indfb-draw-mmap-wc:
> - {shard-rkl}:NOTRUN -> [FAIL][4] +7 similar issues
>[4]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_106130v1/shard-rkl-6/igt@kms_frontbuffer_track...@fbcpsr-1p-primscrn-spr-indfb-draw-mmap-wc.html
>
> * igt@kms_invalid_mode@zero-vdisplay@hdmi-a-1-pipe-a:
> - {shard-dg1}:NOTRUN -> [WARN][5]
>[5]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_106130v1/shard-dg1-19/igt@kms_invalid_mode@zero-vdisp...@hdmi-a-1-pipe-a.html
>
> * {igt@kms_rmfb@rmfb-ioctl@pipe-d-hdmi-a-1}:
> - {shard-dg1}:NOTRUN -> [FAIL][6] +3 similar issues
>[6]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_106130v1/shard-dg1-19/igt@kms_rmfb@rmfb-io...@pipe-d-hdmi-a-1.html
>
>
> Known issues
>
>
> Here are the changes found in Patchwork_106130v1_full that come from known
> issues:
>
> ### IGT changes ###
>
> Issues hit
>
> * igt@gem_create@create-massive:
> - shard-apl: NOTRUN -> [DMESG-WARN][7] ([i915#4991])
>[7]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_106130v1/shard-apl3/igt@gem_cre...@create-massive.html
>
> * igt@gem_ctx_persistence@engines-hostile-preempt:
> - shard-snb: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][8] ([fdo#109271] / [i915#1099]) +1
> similar issue
>[8]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_106130v1/shard-snb4/igt@gem_ctx_persiste...@engines-hostile-preempt.html
>
> * igt@gem_ctx_persistence@hostile:
> - shard-tglb: NOTRUN -> [FAIL][9] ([i915#2410])
>[9]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_106130v1/shard-tglb1/igt@gem_ctx_persiste...@hostile.html
>
> * igt@gem_exec_balancer@parallel-balancer:
> - shard-snb: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][10] ([fdo#109271]) +26 similar
> issues
>[10]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_106130v1/shard-snb4/igt@gem_exec_balan...@parallel-balancer.html
>
> * igt@gem_exec_fair@basi
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915: Correct ss -> steering calculation for pre-Xe_HP platforms
We are tracking igt@i915_selftest@live@hangcheck failures with no logs here
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/6172
igt@i915_selftest@live@hangcheck - incomplete - No warnings/errors
Lakshmi.
-Original Message-
From: Roper, Matthew D
Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2022 9:26 AM
To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: Vudum, Lakshminarayana
Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915: Correct ss -> steering
calculation for pre-Xe_HP platforms
On Wed, Jul 13, 2022 at 03:50:35AM +, Patchwork wrote:
> == Series Details ==
>
> Series: drm/i915: Correct ss -> steering calculation for pre-Xe_HP platforms
> URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/106269/
> State : failure
>
> == Summary ==
>
> CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11877_full -> Patchwork_106269v1_full
>
>
> Summary
> ---
>
> **FAILURE**
>
> Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_106269v1_full absolutely need
> to be
> verified manually.
>
> If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
> introduced in Patchwork_106269v1_full, please notify your bug team to allow
> them
> to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI.
>
>
>
> Participating hosts (13 -> 13)
> --
>
> No changes in participating hosts
>
> Possible new issues
> ---
>
> Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in
> Patchwork_106269v1_full:
>
> ### IGT changes ###
>
> Possible regressions
>
> * igt@i915_selftest@live@hangcheck:
> - shard-skl: NOTRUN -> [INCOMPLETE][1]
>[1]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_106269v1/shard-skl9/igt@i915_selftest@l...@hangcheck.html
Random incomplete (logs cut off abruptly with no errors reported). Does
not appear to be related to this patch.
Patch applied to drm-intel-gt-next. Thanks Lucas for the review.
Matt
>
>
> Suppressed
>
> The following results come from untrusted machines, tests, or statuses.
> They do not affect the overall result.
>
> * igt@drm_buddy@all:
> - {shard-dg1}:NOTRUN -> [SKIP][2] +4 similar issues
>[2]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_106269v1/shard-dg1-15/igt@drm_bu...@all.html
>
> * igt@kms_setmode@clone-exclusive-crtc:
> - {shard-dg1}:NOTRUN -> [INCOMPLETE][3]
>[3]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_106269v1/shard-dg1-16/igt@kms_setm...@clone-exclusive-crtc.html
>
>
> Known issues
>
>
> Here are the changes found in Patchwork_106269v1_full that come from known
> issues:
>
> ### CI changes ###
>
> Issues hit
>
> * boot:
> - shard-skl: ([PASS][4], [PASS][5], [PASS][6], [PASS][7],
> [PASS][8], [PASS][9], [PASS][10], [PASS][11], [PASS][12], [PASS][13],
> [PASS][14], [PASS][15], [PASS][16], [PASS][17], [PASS][18], [PASS][19],
> [PASS][20], [PASS][21], [PASS][22], [PASS][23], [PASS][24]) -> ([PASS][25],
> [PASS][26], [PASS][27], [PASS][28], [PASS][29], [PASS][30], [PASS][31],
> [PASS][32], [PASS][33], [PASS][34], [FAIL][35], [PASS][36], [PASS][37],
> [PASS][38], [PASS][39], [PASS][40], [PASS][41], [PASS][42], [PASS][43],
> [PASS][44]) ([i915#5032])
>[4]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11877/shard-skl9/boot.html
>[5]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11877/shard-skl9/boot.html
>[6]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11877/shard-skl7/boot.html
>[7]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11877/shard-skl7/boot.html
>[8]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11877/shard-skl6/boot.html
>[9]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11877/shard-skl6/boot.html
>[10]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11877/shard-skl5/boot.html
>[11]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11877/shard-skl5/boot.html
>[12]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11877/shard-skl4/boot.html
>[13]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11877/shard-skl4/boot.html
>[14]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11877/shard-skl4/boot.html
>[15]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11877/shard-skl3/boot.html
>[16]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11877/shard-skl3/boot.html
>[17]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11877/shard-skl2/boot.html
>[18]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DR
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915/tgl+: Fix HDMI transcoder clock vs. DDI BUF disabling order
Filed a new issue https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/6460 and re-reported. But shards re-reporting is not working at the moment? FYI @Sarvela, Tomi P Lakshmi. -Original Message- From: Deak, Imre Sent: Monday, July 18, 2022 5:21 AM To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Nautiyal, Ankit K ; Vudum, Lakshminarayana Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915/tgl+: Fix HDMI transcoder clock vs. DDI BUF disabling order On Sat, Jun 18, 2022 at 12:50:26AM +, Patchwork wrote: > == Series Details == > > Series: drm/i915/tgl+: Fix HDMI transcoder clock vs. DDI BUF disabling order > URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/105290/ > State : failure Thanks for the review, patch pushed to drm-intel-next. The failure is unrelated, see below. > == Summary == > > CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11775_full -> Patchwork_105290v1_full > > > Summary > --- > > **FAILURE** > > Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_105290v1_full absolutely need > to be > verified manually. > > If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes > introduced in Patchwork_105290v1_full, please notify your bug team to allow > them > to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI. > > > > Participating hosts (13 -> 10) > -- > > Missing(3): shard-rkl shard-dg1 shard-tglu > > Possible new issues > --- > > Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in > Patchwork_105290v1_full: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Possible regressions > > * igt@kms_atomic_transition@modeset-transition-nonblocking@1x-outputs: > - shard-tglb: [PASS][1] -> [INCOMPLETE][2] >[1]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11775/shard-tglb5/igt@kms_atomic_transition@modeset-transition-nonblock...@1x-outputs.html >[2]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_105290v1/shard-tglb > 3/igt@kms_atomic_transition@modeset-transition-nonblocking@1x-outputs. > html There is no HDMI output modesetted on the above machine, so the issue is unrelated. > Known issues > > > Here are the changes found in Patchwork_105290v1_full that come from known > issues: > > ### CI changes ### > > Issues hit > > * boot: > - shard-apl: ([PASS][3], [PASS][4], [PASS][5], [PASS][6], > [PASS][7], [PASS][8], [PASS][9], [PASS][10], [PASS][11], [PASS][12], > [PASS][13], [PASS][14], [PASS][15], [PASS][16], [PASS][17], [PASS][18], > [PASS][19], [PASS][20], [PASS][21], [PASS][22], [PASS][23], [PASS][24], > [PASS][25], [PASS][26], [PASS][27]) -> ([PASS][28], [PASS][29], [PASS][30], > [PASS][31], [PASS][32], [PASS][33], [PASS][34], [PASS][35], [PASS][36], > [PASS][37], [PASS][38], [PASS][39], [PASS][40], [PASS][41], [PASS][42], > [PASS][43], [PASS][44], [PASS][45], [PASS][46], [PASS][47], [PASS][48], > [PASS][49], [PASS][50], [FAIL][51], [PASS][52]) ([i915#4386]) >[3]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11775/shard-apl8/boot.html >[4]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11775/shard-apl8/boot.html >[5]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11775/shard-apl8/boot.html >[6]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11775/shard-apl8/boot.html >[7]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11775/shard-apl7/boot.html >[8]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11775/shard-apl7/boot.html >[9]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11775/shard-apl7/boot.html >[10]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11775/shard-apl7/boot.html >[11]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11775/shard-apl6/boot.html >[12]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11775/shard-apl6/boot.html >[13]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11775/shard-apl6/boot.html >[14]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11775/shard-apl4/boot.html >[15]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11775/shard-apl4/boot.html >[16]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11775/shard-apl4/boot.html >[17]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11775/shard-apl3/boot.html >[18]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11775/shard-apl3/boot.html >[19]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11775/shard-apl3/boot.html >[20]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11775/shard-apl3/boot.html >
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915: clear plane color ctl setting when turn full plane off (rev3)
Shawn,
I see from our CI that we haven’t seen FIFO underruns lately on ADL-M and RKL.
I see your series is using IGT_6598 and CI is using IGT_6603. Not sure, how old
is the one used in the series and how much it makes difference.
@Kurmi, Suresh Kumar<mailto:suresh.kumar.ku...@intel.com>/@Naramasetti,
LaxminarayanaX<mailto:laxminarayanax.naramase...@intel.com> How do you see this
issue? Should I file a new issue and re-report?
Thanks,
Lakshmi.
From: Lee, Shawn C
Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2022 8:10 AM
To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: Shankar, Uma ; Vudum, Lakshminarayana
Subject: RE: ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915: clear plane color ctl setting
when turn full plane off (rev3)
Hi Lakshmi,
Below issues are not related to the patch. Re-run these test cases with this
patch and get pass result on my local machine.
Best regards,
Shawn
From: Patchwork
mailto:patchw...@emeril.freedesktop.org>>
Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2022 4:54 PM
To: Lee, Shawn C mailto:shawn.c@intel.com>>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org<mailto:intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
Subject: ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915: clear plane color ctl setting when
turn full plane off (rev3)
Patch Details
Series:
drm/i915: clear plane color ctl setting when turn full plane off (rev3)
URL:
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/106292/
State:
failure
Details:
https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_106292v3/index.html
CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11946 -> Patchwork_106292v3
Summary
FAILURE
Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_106292v3 absolutely need to be
verified manually.
If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
introduced in Patchwork_106292v3, please notify your bug team to allow them
to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI.
External URL:
https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_106292v3/index.html
Participating hosts (38 -> 37)
Additional (2): fi-hsw-4770 bat-jsl-1
Missing (3): fi-rkl-11600 fi-bdw-samus bat-dg1-5
Possible new issues
Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in
Patchwork_106292v3:
IGT changes
Possible regressions
* igt@kms_cursor_legacy@basic-flip-after-cursor@atomic-transitions:
* fi-adl-ddr5:
PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11946/fi-adl-ddr5/igt@kms_cursor_legacy@basic-flip-after-cur...@atomic-transitions.html>
->
DMESG-WARN<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_106292v3/fi-adl-ddr5/igt@kms_cursor_legacy@basic-flip-after-cur...@atomic-transitions.html>
+4 similar issues
*
igt@kms_cursor_legacy@basic-flip-before-cursor@atomic-transitions-varying-size:
* fi-rkl-guc:
PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11946/fi-rkl-guc/igt@kms_cursor_legacy@basic-flip-before-cur...@atomic-transitions-varying-size.html>
->
DMESG-WARN<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_106292v3/fi-rkl-guc/igt@kms_cursor_legacy@basic-flip-before-cur...@atomic-transitions-varying-size.html>
+3 similar issues
Suppressed
The following results come from untrusted machines, tests, or statuses.
They do not affect the overall result.
* igt@kms_cursor_legacy@basic-flip-before-cursor@atomic-transitions:
* {bat-rplp-1}:
PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11946/bat-rplp-1/igt@kms_cursor_legacy@basic-flip-before-cur...@atomic-transitions.html>
->
DMESG-WARN<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_106292v3/bat-rplp-1/igt@kms_cursor_legacy@basic-flip-before-cur...@atomic-transitions.html>
+3 similar issues
*
igt@kms_cursor_legacy@basic-flip-before-cursor@atomic-transitions-varying-size:
* {bat-rpls-2}: NOTRUN ->
DMESG-WARN<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_106292v3/bat-rpls-2/igt@kms_cursor_legacy@basic-flip-before-cur...@atomic-transitions-varying-size.html>
+15 similar issues
* {fi-jsl-1}:
PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11946/fi-jsl-1/igt@kms_cursor_legacy@basic-flip-before-cur...@atomic-transitions-varying-size.html>
->
DMESG-WARN<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_106292v3/fi-jsl-1/igt@kms_cursor_legacy@basic-flip-before-cur...@atomic-transitions-varying-size.html>
+4 similar issues
* {bat-rpls-1}:
PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11946/bat-rpls-1/igt@kms_cursor_legacy@basic-flip-before-cur...@atomic-transitions-varying-size.html>
->
DMESG-WARN<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_106292v3/bat-rpls-1/igt@kms_cursor_legacy@basic-flip-before-cur...@atomic-transitions-varying-size.html>
+5 similar issues
* {fi-ehl-2}:
PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11946/fi-ehl-2/igt@kms_cursor_legacy@basic-flip-before-cur...@atomic-transitions-varying-size.html>
->
DMESG-WARN<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.o
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915: clear plane color ctl setting when turn full plane off (rev3)
From: Vudum, Lakshminarayana
Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2022 8:36 AM
To: 20220722070343.10654-1-shawn.c@intel.com;
intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Kurmi, Suresh Kumar
; Naramasetti, LaxminarayanaX
Cc: Shankar, Uma
Subject: RE: ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915: clear plane color ctl setting
when turn full plane off (rev3)
Shawn,
I see from our CI that we haven’t seen FIFO underruns lately on ADL-M and RKL.
I see your series is using IGT_6598 and CI is using IGT_6603. Not sure, how old
is the one used in the series and how much it makes difference.
@Kurmi, Suresh Kumar<mailto:suresh.kumar.ku...@intel.com>/@Naramasetti,
LaxminarayanaX<mailto:laxminarayanax.naramase...@intel.com> How do you see this
issue? Should I file a new issue and re-report?
Thanks,
Lakshmi.
From: Lee, Shawn C mailto:shawn.c@intel.com>>
Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2022 8:10 AM
To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org<mailto:intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
Cc: Shankar, Uma mailto:uma.shan...@intel.com>>; Vudum,
Lakshminarayana
mailto:lakshminarayana.vu...@intel.com>>
Subject: RE: ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915: clear plane color ctl setting
when turn full plane off (rev3)
Hi Lakshmi,
Below issues are not related to the patch. Re-run these test cases with this
patch and get pass result on my local machine.
Best regards,
Shawn
From: Patchwork
mailto:patchw...@emeril.freedesktop.org>>
Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2022 4:54 PM
To: Lee, Shawn C mailto:shawn.c@intel.com>>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org<mailto:intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
Subject: ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915: clear plane color ctl setting when
turn full plane off (rev3)
Patch Details
Series:
drm/i915: clear plane color ctl setting when turn full plane off (rev3)
URL:
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/106292/
State:
failure
Details:
https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_106292v3/index.html
CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11946 -> Patchwork_106292v3
Summary
FAILURE
Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_106292v3 absolutely need to be
verified manually.
If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
introduced in Patchwork_106292v3, please notify your bug team to allow them
to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI.
External URL:
https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_106292v3/index.html
Participating hosts (38 -> 37)
Additional (2): fi-hsw-4770 bat-jsl-1
Missing (3): fi-rkl-11600 fi-bdw-samus bat-dg1-5
Possible new issues
Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in
Patchwork_106292v3:
IGT changes
Possible regressions
* igt@kms_cursor_legacy@basic-flip-after-cursor@atomic-transitions:
* fi-adl-ddr5:
PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11946/fi-adl-ddr5/igt@kms_cursor_legacy@basic-flip-after-cur...@atomic-transitions.html>
->
DMESG-WARN<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_106292v3/fi-adl-ddr5/igt@kms_cursor_legacy@basic-flip-after-cur...@atomic-transitions.html>
+4 similar issues
*
igt@kms_cursor_legacy@basic-flip-before-cursor@atomic-transitions-varying-size:
* fi-rkl-guc:
PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11946/fi-rkl-guc/igt@kms_cursor_legacy@basic-flip-before-cur...@atomic-transitions-varying-size.html>
->
DMESG-WARN<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_106292v3/fi-rkl-guc/igt@kms_cursor_legacy@basic-flip-before-cur...@atomic-transitions-varying-size.html>
+3 similar issues
Suppressed
The following results come from untrusted machines, tests, or statuses.
They do not affect the overall result.
* igt@kms_cursor_legacy@basic-flip-before-cursor@atomic-transitions:
* {bat-rplp-1}:
PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11946/bat-rplp-1/igt@kms_cursor_legacy@basic-flip-before-cur...@atomic-transitions.html>
->
DMESG-WARN<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_106292v3/bat-rplp-1/igt@kms_cursor_legacy@basic-flip-before-cur...@atomic-transitions.html>
+3 similar issues
*
igt@kms_cursor_legacy@basic-flip-before-cursor@atomic-transitions-varying-size:
* {bat-rpls-2}: NOTRUN ->
DMESG-WARN<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_106292v3/bat-rpls-2/igt@kms_cursor_legacy@basic-flip-before-cur...@atomic-transitions-varying-size.html>
+15 similar issues
* {fi-jsl-1}:
PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11946/fi-jsl-1/igt@kms_cursor_legacy@basic-flip-before-cur...@atomic-transitions-varying-size.html>
->
DMESG-WARN<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_106292v3/fi-jsl-1/igt@kms_cursor_legacy@basic-flip-before-cur...@atomic-transitions-varying-size.html>
+4 similar issues
* {bat-rpls-1}:
PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11946/bat-rpls-1/igt@kms_c
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915: clear plane color ctl setting when turn full plane off (rev3)
I have never done that. Author probably should have access to that. If I remember correctly, there should be a re-run button which I not able to see at the moment. Lakshmi. From: Shankar, Uma Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2022 10:50 PM To: Kurmi, Suresh Kumar ; Vudum, Lakshminarayana ; Lee, Shawn C ; intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Naramasetti, LaxminarayanaX Subject: RE: ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915: clear plane color ctl setting when turn full plane off (rev3) Hi Lakshmi, Can you trigger a re-run just to confirm as recommended by Suresh. Regards, Uma Shankar From: Kurmi, Suresh Kumar mailto:suresh.kumar.ku...@intel.com>> Sent: Friday, July 29, 2022 9:29 AM To: Vudum, Lakshminarayana mailto:lakshminarayana.vu...@intel.com>>; Lee, Shawn C mailto:shawn.c@intel.com>>; intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org<mailto:intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>; Naramasetti, LaxminarayanaX mailto:laxminarayanax.naramase...@intel.com>> Cc: Shankar, Uma mailto:uma.shan...@intel.com>> Subject: RE: ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915: clear plane color ctl setting when turn full plane off (rev3) IGT_6598 is very old, we should trigger the re-run with the latest CI IGT version since ADL-M and RKL has been very stable BAT machine. -Suresh From: Vudum, Lakshminarayana mailto:lakshminarayana.vu...@intel.com>> Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2022 9:08 PM To: Lee, Shawn C mailto:shawn.c@intel.com>>; intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org<mailto:intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>; Kurmi, Suresh Kumar mailto:suresh.kumar.ku...@intel.com>>; Naramasetti, LaxminarayanaX mailto:laxminarayanax.naramase...@intel.com>> Cc: Shankar, Uma mailto:uma.shan...@intel.com>> Subject: RE: ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915: clear plane color ctl setting when turn full plane off (rev3) From: Vudum, Lakshminarayana Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2022 8:36 AM To: 20220722070343.10654-1-shawn.c@intel.com<mailto:20220722070343.10654-1-shawn.c@intel.com>; intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org<mailto:intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>; Kurmi, Suresh Kumar mailto:suresh.kumar.ku...@intel.com>>; Naramasetti, LaxminarayanaX mailto:laxminarayanax.naramase...@intel.com>> Cc: Shankar, Uma mailto:uma.shan...@intel.com>> Subject: RE: ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915: clear plane color ctl setting when turn full plane off (rev3) Shawn, I see from our CI that we haven’t seen FIFO underruns lately on ADL-M and RKL. I see your series is using IGT_6598 and CI is using IGT_6603. Not sure, how old is the one used in the series and how much it makes difference. @Kurmi, Suresh Kumar<mailto:suresh.kumar.ku...@intel.com>/@Naramasetti, LaxminarayanaX<mailto:laxminarayanax.naramase...@intel.com> How do you see this issue? Should I file a new issue and re-report? Thanks, Lakshmi. From: Lee, Shawn C mailto:shawn.c@intel.com>> Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2022 8:10 AM To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org<mailto:intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org> Cc: Shankar, Uma mailto:uma.shan...@intel.com>>; Vudum, Lakshminarayana mailto:lakshminarayana.vu...@intel.com>> Subject: RE: ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915: clear plane color ctl setting when turn full plane off (rev3) Hi Lakshmi, Below issues are not related to the patch. Re-run these test cases with this patch and get pass result on my local machine. Best regards, Shawn From: Patchwork mailto:patchw...@emeril.freedesktop.org>> Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2022 4:54 PM To: Lee, Shawn C mailto:shawn.c@intel.com>> Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org<mailto:intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org> Subject: ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915: clear plane color ctl setting when turn full plane off (rev3) Patch Details Series: drm/i915: clear plane color ctl setting when turn full plane off (rev3) URL: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/106292/ State: failure Details: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_106292v3/index.html CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11946 -> Patchwork_106292v3 Summary FAILURE Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_106292v3 absolutely need to be verified manually. If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes introduced in Patchwork_106292v3, please notify your bug team to allow them to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI. External URL: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_106292v3/index.html Participating hosts (38 -> 37) Additional (2): fi-hsw-4770 bat-jsl-1 Missing (3): fi-rkl-11600 fi-bdw-samus bat-dg1-5 Possible new issues Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in Patchwork_106292v3: IGT changes Possible regressions * igt@kms_cursor_legacy@basic-flip-after-cursor@atomic-transitions: * fi-adl-ddr5: PASS<https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11946/fi-adl-dd
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915/d13: Fix unclaimed accesses while loading PIPEDMC-C/D
Couple of bugs filed for these failures and re-reported. https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/6576 https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/6575 Thanks, Lakshmi. -Original Message- From: Deak, Imre Sent: Monday, August 15, 2022 1:50 AM To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Murthy, Arun R Cc: Vudum, Lakshminarayana Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915/d13: Fix unclaimed accesses while loading PIPEDMC-C/D On Mon, Aug 08, 2022 at 02:42:22PM +, Patchwork wrote: > == Series Details == > > Series: drm/i915/d13: Fix unclaimed accesses while loading PIPEDMC-C/D > URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/107059/ > State : failure Thanks for the review pushed to drm-intel-next. The failure below is unrelated as it's on GLK where the change shouldn't have an effect. > > == Summary == > > CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11972_full -> Patchwork_107059v1_full > > > Summary > --- > > **FAILURE** > > Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_107059v1_full absolutely need > to be > verified manually. > > If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes > introduced in Patchwork_107059v1_full, please notify your bug team to allow > them > to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI. > > > > Participating hosts (12 -> 12) > -- > > No changes in participating hosts > > Possible new issues > --- > > Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in > Patchwork_107059v1_full: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Possible regressions > > * igt@kms_flip@2x-absolute-wf_vblank-interruptible: > - shard-glk: NOTRUN -> [TIMEOUT][1] >[1]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_107059v1/shard-glk7 > /igt@kms_flip@2x-absolute-wf_vblank-interruptible.html > > * igt@perf@enable-disable: > - shard-glk: [PASS][2] -> [TIMEOUT][3] +1 similar issue >[2]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11972/shard-glk9/igt@p...@enable-disable.html >[3]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_107059v1/shard-glk7 > /igt@p...@enable-disable.html > > > Warnings > > * igt@kms_frontbuffer_tracking@psr-2p-scndscrn-spr-indfb-fullscreen: > - shard-glk: [SKIP][4] ([fdo#109271]) -> [TIMEOUT][5] +3 similar > issues >[4]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11972/shard-glk9/igt@kms_frontbuffer_track...@psr-2p-scndscrn-spr-indfb-fullscreen.html >[5]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_107059v1/shard-glk7 > /igt@kms_frontbuffer_track...@psr-2p-scndscrn-spr-indfb-fullscreen.htm > l > > > Known issues > > > Here are the changes found in Patchwork_107059v1_full that come from known > issues: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Issues hit > > * igt@drm_mm@all: > - shard-kbl: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][6] ([fdo#109271]) +157 similar > issues >[6]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_107059v1/shard-kbl7 > /igt@drm...@all.html > > * igt@gem_exec_balancer@parallel-keep-submit-fence: > - shard-iclb: [PASS][7] -> [SKIP][8] ([i915#4525]) >[7]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11972/shard-iclb1/igt@gem_exec_balan...@parallel-keep-submit-fence.html >[8]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_107059v1/shard-iclb > 5/igt@gem_exec_balan...@parallel-keep-submit-fence.html > > * igt@gem_exec_balancer@parallel-ordering: > - shard-kbl: NOTRUN -> [FAIL][9] ([i915#6117]) >[9]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_107059v1/shard-kbl1 > /igt@gem_exec_balan...@parallel-ordering.html > > * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-none@vcs0: > - shard-kbl: NOTRUN -> [FAIL][10] ([i915#2842]) +1 similar issue >[10]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_107059v1/shard-kbl7 > /igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-n...@vcs0.html > > * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-pace@rcs0: > - shard-kbl: [PASS][11] -> [FAIL][12] ([i915#2842]) >[11]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11972/shard-kbl4/igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-p...@rcs0.html >[12]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_107059v1/shard-kbl7 > /igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-p...@rcs0.html > > * igt@gem_exec_fair@basic-throttle@rcs0: > - shard-iclb: [PASS][13] -> [FAIL][14] ([i915#2849]) >[13]: > https://intel-gfx-ci
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915/uncore: Warn on previous unclaimed accesses
Those failures are directing towards
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/1436 which was closed long
back and I see the filters are also broken.
So, I have filed a new issue and new filter
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/5566
Thanks,
Lakshmi.
-Original Message-
From: De Marchi, Lucas
Sent: Tuesday, April 5, 2022 8:20 AM
To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: Vudum, Lakshminarayana
Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915/uncore: Warn on previous
unclaimed accesses
On Tue, Apr 05, 2022 at 09:43:58AM +, Patchwork wrote:
>== Series Details ==
>
>Series: drm/i915/uncore: Warn on previous unclaimed accesses
>URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/102167/
>State : failure
>
>== Summary ==
>
>CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11452_full -> Patchwork_22778_full
>
>
>Summary
>---
>
> **FAILURE**
>
> Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_22778_full absolutely
> need to be verified manually.
>
> If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
> introduced in Patchwork_22778_full, please notify your bug team to
> allow them to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false
> positives in CI.
>
>
>
>Participating hosts (12 -> 13)
>--
>
> Additional (1): shard-dg1
>
>Possible new issues
>---
>
> Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in
> Patchwork_22778_full:
>
>### IGT changes ###
>
> Possible regressions
>
> * igt@gen9_exec_parse@allowed-all:
>- shard-skl: [PASS][1] -> [DMESG-WARN][2]
> [1]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11452/shard-skl1/igt@gen9_exec_pa...@allowed-all.html
> [2]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22778/shard-skl4/igt@gen9_exec_pa...@allowed-all.html
>- shard-apl: [PASS][3] -> [DMESG-WARN][4]
> [3]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11452/shard-apl4/igt@gen9_exec_pa...@allowed-all.html
> [4]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22778/shard-apl7/igt@gen9_exec_pa...@allowed-all.html
>- shard-glk: [PASS][5] -> [DMESG-WARN][6]
> [5]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11452/shard-glk1/igt@gen9_exec_pa...@allowed-all.html
> [6]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22778/shard-glk8/igt@gen9_exec_pa...@allowed-all.html
>- shard-kbl: [PASS][7] -> [DMESG-WARN][8]
> [7]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11452/shard-kbl6/igt@gen9_exec_pa...@allowed-all.html
> [8]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22778/shard-kbl7/ig
> t@gen9_exec_pa...@allowed-all.html
don't shoot the messenger :)
Lakshmi, these need to be mapped to previous failures. Here we are just
changing the message logged to make clear they aren't caused by the register we
are currently reading/writting, but it's rather cause by a previous read/write.
All of these should have a previous issue already with the different message,
not being caused by this patch.
Lucas De Marchi
>
>
> Suppressed
>
> The following results come from untrusted machines, tests, or statuses.
> They do not affect the overall result.
>
> * igt@i915_pm_rpm@system-suspend-devices:
>- {shard-rkl}:[PASS][9] -> [FAIL][10]
> [9]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11452/shard-rkl-1/igt@i915_pm_...@system-suspend-devices.html
> [10]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22778/shard-rkl-5/i
> gt@i915_pm_...@system-suspend-devices.html
>
>
>Known issues
>
>
> Here are the changes found in Patchwork_22778_full that come from known
> issues:
>
>### CI changes ###
>
> Issues hit
>
> * boot:
>- shard-skl: ([PASS][11], [PASS][12], [PASS][13], [PASS][14],
> [PASS][15], [PASS][16], [PASS][17], [PASS][18], [PASS][19], [PASS][20],
> [PASS][21], [PASS][22], [PASS][23], [PASS][24], [PASS][25], [PASS][26],
> [PASS][27], [PASS][28], [PASS][29], [PASS][30], [PASS][31], [PASS][32],
> [PASS][33], [PASS][34], [PASS][35]) -> ([PASS][36], [PASS][37], [PASS][38],
> [PASS][39], [PASS][40], [PASS][41], [PASS][42], [PASS][43], [PASS][44],
> [PASS][45], [PASS][46], [FAIL][47], [PASS][48], [PASS][49], [PASS][50],
> [PASS][51], [PASS][52], [PASS][53], [PASS][54], [PASS][55], [PASS][56],
> [PASS][57]) ([i915#5032])
> [11]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11452/shard-skl9/boot.html
> [12]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11452/shard-skl9/boot.html
> [13]
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915: Sunset igpu legacy mmap support based on GRAPHICS_VER_FULL
Regression is related to https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/5602
All tests - *ERROR* Scratch setup failed, DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(lock->magic !=
lock)
Lakshmi.
-Original Message-
From: Roper, Matthew D
Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2022 4:15 PM
To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: Vudum, Lakshminarayana
Subject: Re: ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915: Sunset igpu legacy mmap support
based on GRAPHICS_VER_FULL
On Thu, Apr 07, 2022 at 10:23:34PM +, Patchwork wrote:
> == Series Details ==
>
> Series: drm/i915: Sunset igpu legacy mmap support based on GRAPHICS_VER_FULL
> URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/102352/
> State : failure
>
> == Summary ==
>
> CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11472 -> Patchwork_22819
>
>
> Summary
> ---
>
> **FAILURE**
>
> Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_22819 absolutely need to be
> verified manually.
>
> If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
> introduced in Patchwork_22819, please notify your bug team to allow them
> to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI.
>
> External URL:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22819/index.html
>
> Participating hosts (49 -> 35)
> --
>
> Additional (1): fi-bwr-2160
> Missing(15): fi-bdw-samus shard-tglu bat-adls-5 bat-dg1-6 bat-dg1-5
> bat-dg2-8 shard-rkl bat-dg2-9 fi-bsw-cyan bat-adlp-6 bat-rpls-1 fi-blb-e6850
> shard-dg1 bat-jsl-2 bat-jsl-1
>
> Possible new issues
> ---
>
> Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in
> Patchwork_22819:
>
> ### CI changes ###
>
> Possible regressions
>
> * boot:
> - fi-bwr-2160:NOTRUN -> [FAIL][1]
>[1]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22819/fi-bwr-2160/b
> oot.html
>
It looks like something failed during the initial driver probe (not sure what;
there don't seem to be any obvious warnings/errors) and then driver cleanup
started triggering more warnings and an eventual panic since not everything
being cleaned up had been fully setup at that point.
Not related to this patch (which shouldn't have any functional impact on any
currently-existing platform).
Matt
>
>
> ### IGT changes ###
>
> Possible regressions
>
> * igt@gem_lmem_swapping@basic:
> - fi-cfl-8109u: NOTRUN -> [FAIL][2]
>[2]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22819/fi-cfl-8109u/
> igt@gem_lmem_swapp...@basic.html
>
>
> Warnings
>
> * igt@runner@aborted:
> - fi-kbl-x1275: [FAIL][3] ([i915#4312]) -> [FAIL][4]
>[3]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11472/fi-kbl-x1275/igt@run...@aborted.html
>[4]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22819/fi-kbl-x1275/igt@run...@aborted.html
> - fi-kbl-guc: [FAIL][5] ([i915#4312] / [i915#5257]) -> [FAIL][6]
>[5]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11472/fi-kbl-guc/igt@run...@aborted.html
>[6]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22819/fi-kbl-guc/igt@run...@aborted.html
> - fi-kbl-7567u: [FAIL][7] ([i915#4312]) -> [FAIL][8]
>[7]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11472/fi-kbl-7567u/igt@run...@aborted.html
>[8]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22819/fi-kbl-7567u/
> igt@run...@aborted.html
>
>
> Suppressed
>
> The following results come from untrusted machines, tests, or statuses.
> They do not affect the overall result.
>
> * igt@runner@aborted:
> - {fi-jsl-1}: [FAIL][9] ([i915#4312]) -> [FAIL][10]
>[9]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11472/fi-jsl-1/igt@run...@aborted.html
>[10]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22819/fi-jsl-1/igt@
> run...@aborted.html
>
>
> Known issues
>
>
> Here are the changes found in Patchwork_22819 that come from known issues:
>
> ### IGT changes ###
>
> Issues hit
>
> * igt@core_auth@basic-auth:
> - fi-kbl-8809g: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][11] ([fdo#109271]) +1 similar issue
>[11]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22819/fi-kbl-8809g/
> igt@core_a...@basic-auth.html
>
> * igt@fbdev@eof:
> - fi-kbl-8809g: NOTRUN -> [INCOMPLETE][12] ([i915#5557])
>[12]:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22819/fi-kbl-8809g/
> igt@fb...@eof.html
>
> * igt@gem_
