* drm-intel-fixes CI issues
@ 2018-10-10 22:53 Rodrigo Vivi
2018-10-10 23:17 ` David Airlie
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Rodrigo Vivi @ 2018-10-10 22:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: intel-gfx, Jani Nikula, Joonas Lahtinen, Manasi Navare,
Ville Syrjälä, Lyude Paul
Cc: Vetter, Daniel, Dave Airlie
Hi all,
I need your help to decide what to do with this round of fixes.
I have collected these patches this week:
commit b43e8916172a ("drm/i915/dp: Link train Fallback on eDP only if fallback link BW can fit panel's native mode")
commit 5abb01e541ed ("drm/i915: Fix intel_dp_mst_best_encoder()")
commit 02713246296d ("drm/i915: Skip vcpi allocation for MSTB ports that are gone")
commit cc6e027f5f50 ("drm/i915: Don't unset intel_connector->mst_port")
commit f5aec50ba21e ("drm/i915: Use the correct crtc when sanitizing plane mapping")
commit 6547684bf50a ("drm/i915: Restore vblank interrupts earlier")
CI_DIF_309 represents Greg's v4.19-rc7 and it is clean.
However 2 following CI runs are kind of strange.
There's few underruns here and there, but those looks flip-flops.
My biggest concern is specially around:
igt@kms_plane@pixel-format-pipe-a-planes:
https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-intel-fixes/shards.html
https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-intel-fixes/CI_DIF_311/shard-glk8/igt@kms_plane@pixel-format-pipe-c-planes.html
Thoughts?
I'm holding the pull request for now and will try to do some local tests here
to see if I can identify a culprit.
Thanks,
Rodrigo.
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread* Re: drm-intel-fixes CI issues 2018-10-10 22:53 drm-intel-fixes CI issues Rodrigo Vivi @ 2018-10-10 23:17 ` David Airlie 2018-10-10 23:34 ` Lyude Paul ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: David Airlie @ 2018-10-10 23:17 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Vivi, Rodrigo Cc: ville.syrjala, jani.nikula, Development, Intel, Daniel Vetter On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 8:53 AM Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com> wrote: > > Hi all, > > I need your help to decide what to do with this round of fixes. > > I have collected these patches this week: > > commit b43e8916172a ("drm/i915/dp: Link train Fallback on eDP only if fallback link BW can fit panel's native mode") > commit 5abb01e541ed ("drm/i915: Fix intel_dp_mst_best_encoder()") > commit 02713246296d ("drm/i915: Skip vcpi allocation for MSTB ports that are gone") > commit cc6e027f5f50 ("drm/i915: Don't unset intel_connector->mst_port") > commit f5aec50ba21e ("drm/i915: Use the correct crtc when sanitizing plane mapping") > commit 6547684bf50a ("drm/i915: Restore vblank interrupts earlier") > > CI_DIF_309 represents Greg's v4.19-rc7 and it is clean. > > However 2 following CI runs are kind of strange. > > There's few underruns here and there, but those looks flip-flops. > > My biggest concern is specially around: > > igt@kms_plane@pixel-format-pipe-a-planes: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-intel-fixes/shards.html > > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-intel-fixes/CI_DIF_311/shard-glk8/igt@kms_plane@pixel-format-pipe-c-planes.html > > Thoughts? > > I'm holding the pull request for now and will try to do some local tests here > to see if I can identify a culprit. At this late in the game for rc8, unless these fix a major regression in the current tree, I'd say drop them until -next. Dave. _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: drm-intel-fixes CI issues 2018-10-10 23:17 ` David Airlie @ 2018-10-10 23:34 ` Lyude Paul 2018-10-11 19:38 ` Manasi Navare 2018-10-15 19:59 ` Lyude Paul 2 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Lyude Paul @ 2018-10-10 23:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David Airlie, Vivi, Rodrigo Cc: ville.syrjala, jani.nikula, Development, Intel, Daniel Vetter speaking for my own patches here I'm fine with that! On Thu, 2018-10-11 at 09:17 +1000, David Airlie wrote: > On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 8:53 AM Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com> wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > > > I need your help to decide what to do with this round of fixes. > > > > I have collected these patches this week: > > > > commit b43e8916172a ("drm/i915/dp: Link train Fallback on eDP only if > > fallback link BW can fit panel's native mode") > > commit 5abb01e541ed ("drm/i915: Fix intel_dp_mst_best_encoder()") > > commit 02713246296d ("drm/i915: Skip vcpi allocation for MSTB ports that > > are gone") > > commit cc6e027f5f50 ("drm/i915: Don't unset intel_connector->mst_port") > > commit f5aec50ba21e ("drm/i915: Use the correct crtc when sanitizing plane > > mapping") > > commit 6547684bf50a ("drm/i915: Restore vblank interrupts earlier") > > > > CI_DIF_309 represents Greg's v4.19-rc7 and it is clean. > > > > However 2 following CI runs are kind of strange. > > > > There's few underruns here and there, but those looks flip-flops. > > > > My biggest concern is specially around: > > > > igt@kms_plane@pixel-format-pipe-a-planes: > > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-intel-fixes/shards.html > > > > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-intel-fixes/CI_DIF_311/shard-glk8/igt@kms_plane@pixel-format-pipe-c-planes.html > > > > Thoughts? > > > > I'm holding the pull request for now and will try to do some local tests > > here > > to see if I can identify a culprit. > > At this late in the game for rc8, unless these fix a major regression > in the current tree, I'd say drop them until -next. > > Dave. -- Cheers, Lyude Paul _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: drm-intel-fixes CI issues 2018-10-10 23:17 ` David Airlie 2018-10-10 23:34 ` Lyude Paul @ 2018-10-11 19:38 ` Manasi Navare 2018-10-15 19:59 ` Lyude Paul 2 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Manasi Navare @ 2018-10-11 19:38 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David Airlie Cc: jani.nikula, Development, Intel, Daniel Vetter, Vivi, Rodrigo, ville.syrjala On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 09:17:52AM +1000, David Airlie wrote: > On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 8:53 AM Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com> wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > > > I need your help to decide what to do with this round of fixes. > > > > I have collected these patches this week: > > > > commit b43e8916172a ("drm/i915/dp: Link train Fallback on eDP only if fallback link BW can fit panel's native mode") > > commit 5abb01e541ed ("drm/i915: Fix intel_dp_mst_best_encoder()") > > commit 02713246296d ("drm/i915: Skip vcpi allocation for MSTB ports that are gone") > > commit cc6e027f5f50 ("drm/i915: Don't unset intel_connector->mst_port") > > commit f5aec50ba21e ("drm/i915: Use the correct crtc when sanitizing plane mapping") > > commit 6547684bf50a ("drm/i915: Restore vblank interrupts earlier") > > > > CI_DIF_309 represents Greg's v4.19-rc7 and it is clean. > > > > However 2 following CI runs are kind of strange. > > > > There's few underruns here and there, but those looks flip-flops. > > > > My biggest concern is specially around: > > > > igt@kms_plane@pixel-format-pipe-a-planes: > > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-intel-fixes/shards.html > > > > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-intel-fixes/CI_DIF_311/shard-glk8/igt@kms_plane@pixel-format-pipe-c-planes.html > > > > Thoughts? > > > > I'm holding the pull request for now and will try to do some local tests here > > to see if I can identify a culprit. > > At this late in the game for rc8, unless these fix a major regression > in the current tree, I'd say drop them until -next. > I am okay with that w.r.t my patch ("drm/i915/dp: Link train Fallback on eDP only if fallback link BW can fit panel's native mode") Manasi > Dave. _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: drm-intel-fixes CI issues 2018-10-10 23:17 ` David Airlie 2018-10-10 23:34 ` Lyude Paul 2018-10-11 19:38 ` Manasi Navare @ 2018-10-15 19:59 ` Lyude Paul 2018-10-15 21:20 ` Rodrigo Vivi 2 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Lyude Paul @ 2018-10-15 19:59 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David Airlie, Vivi, Rodrigo Cc: ville.syrjala, jani.nikula, Development, Intel, Daniel Vetter Poke: still wondering what we should do about the patch in these fixes that came up a little later which got Cc'd to stable, despite it apparently not being a patch we want in stable (mentioned this over IRC): https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/255428/ and https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/50770/ On Thu, 2018-10-11 at 09:17 +1000, David Airlie wrote: > On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 8:53 AM Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com> wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > > > I need your help to decide what to do with this round of fixes. > > > > I have collected these patches this week: > > > > commit b43e8916172a ("drm/i915/dp: Link train Fallback on eDP only if > > fallback link BW can fit panel's native mode") > > commit 5abb01e541ed ("drm/i915: Fix intel_dp_mst_best_encoder()") > > commit 02713246296d ("drm/i915: Skip vcpi allocation for MSTB ports that > > are gone") > > commit cc6e027f5f50 ("drm/i915: Don't unset intel_connector->mst_port") > > commit f5aec50ba21e ("drm/i915: Use the correct crtc when sanitizing plane > > mapping") > > commit 6547684bf50a ("drm/i915: Restore vblank interrupts earlier") > > > > CI_DIF_309 represents Greg's v4.19-rc7 and it is clean. > > > > However 2 following CI runs are kind of strange. > > > > There's few underruns here and there, but those looks flip-flops. > > > > My biggest concern is specially around: > > > > igt@kms_plane@pixel-format-pipe-a-planes: > > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-intel-fixes/shards.html > > > > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-intel-fixes/CI_DIF_311/shard-glk8/igt@kms_plane@pixel-format-pipe-c-planes.html > > > > Thoughts? > > > > I'm holding the pull request for now and will try to do some local tests > > here > > to see if I can identify a culprit. > > At this late in the game for rc8, unless these fix a major regression > in the current tree, I'd say drop them until -next. > > Dave. -- Cheers, Lyude Paul _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: drm-intel-fixes CI issues 2018-10-15 19:59 ` Lyude Paul @ 2018-10-15 21:20 ` Rodrigo Vivi 2018-10-15 21:31 ` Lyude Paul 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Rodrigo Vivi @ 2018-10-15 21:20 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Lyude Paul Cc: ville.syrjala, jani.nikula, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Development, Intel, Daniel Vetter, David Airlie On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 03:59:36PM -0400, Lyude Paul wrote: > Poke: still wondering what we should do about the patch in these fixes that > came up a little later which got Cc'd to stable, despite it apparently not > being a patch we want in stable (mentioned this over IRC): > > https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/255428/ and > https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/50770/ Thanks for bringing this up. So, These 2 patches are merged on the tree, but we don't want them propagated to stable tree anymore? Do we have a fix for those? Or are we reverting them? We probably want to raise this up to Greg so he doesn't pick them when running his stable scripts. But also I was wondering another aspect of these patches I had here on this dropped list. In the end most of patches that was here will be picked by Greg's stable scripts anyways. Also other patches with cc:stable that were on that round but got removed: commit 1e712535c51a ("drm/i915/dp: Link train Fallback on eDP only if fallback link BW can fit panel's native mode") commit 62358aa4ee86 ("drm/i915: Use the correct crtc when sanitizing plane mapping") commit 68bc30deac62 ("drm/i915: Restore vblank interrupts earlier") Should I add back at least these patches this week? Or we should really wait for 4.19 to be released? Thanks, Rodrigo. > > On Thu, 2018-10-11 at 09:17 +1000, David Airlie wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 8:53 AM Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com> wrote: > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > I need your help to decide what to do with this round of fixes. > > > > > > I have collected these patches this week: > > > > > > commit b43e8916172a ("drm/i915/dp: Link train Fallback on eDP only if > > > fallback link BW can fit panel's native mode") > > > commit 5abb01e541ed ("drm/i915: Fix intel_dp_mst_best_encoder()") > > > commit 02713246296d ("drm/i915: Skip vcpi allocation for MSTB ports that > > > are gone") > > > commit cc6e027f5f50 ("drm/i915: Don't unset intel_connector->mst_port") > > > commit f5aec50ba21e ("drm/i915: Use the correct crtc when sanitizing plane > > > mapping") > > > commit 6547684bf50a ("drm/i915: Restore vblank interrupts earlier") > > > > > > CI_DIF_309 represents Greg's v4.19-rc7 and it is clean. > > > > > > However 2 following CI runs are kind of strange. > > > > > > There's few underruns here and there, but those looks flip-flops. > > > > > > My biggest concern is specially around: > > > > > > igt@kms_plane@pixel-format-pipe-a-planes: > > > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-intel-fixes/shards.html > > > > > > > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-intel-fixes/CI_DIF_311/shard-glk8/igt@kms_plane@pixel-format-pipe-c-planes.html > > > > > > Thoughts? > > > > > > I'm holding the pull request for now and will try to do some local tests > > > here > > > to see if I can identify a culprit. > > > > At this late in the game for rc8, unless these fix a major regression > > in the current tree, I'd say drop them until -next. > > > > Dave. > -- > Cheers, > Lyude Paul > _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: drm-intel-fixes CI issues 2018-10-15 21:20 ` Rodrigo Vivi @ 2018-10-15 21:31 ` Lyude Paul 0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Lyude Paul @ 2018-10-15 21:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Rodrigo Vivi, David Airlie Cc: ville.syrjala, jani.nikula, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Development, Intel, Daniel Vetter On Mon, 2018-10-15 at 14:20 -0700, Rodrigo Vivi wrote: > On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 03:59:36PM -0400, Lyude Paul wrote: > > Poke: still wondering what we should do about the patch in these fixes > > that > > came up a little later which got Cc'd to stable, despite it apparently not > > being a patch we want in stable (mentioned this over IRC): > > > > https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/255428/ and > > https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/50770/ > > Thanks for bringing this up. > > So, These 2 patches are merged on the tree, but we don't want > them propagated to stable tree anymore? Do we have a fix for those? > Or are we reverting them? I am in the process of making a fix and am just about finished; just had to clear some corner cases up with danvet. I think we should be fine if we do either one of two things: * Just cc the third patch (once I've got it on the ML today) to stable, since I did want the problem these were intended to fix to also be fixed downstream, and while messy it should take care of fixing the problems that were introduced. * Don't cc the two patches to stable, and I can just handle backporting the third and final fix to stable This is a new situation for me, so I'm honestly not sure which of those two would be the best approach. [more below] > > We probably want to raise this up to Greg so he doesn't pick > them when running his stable scripts. > > But also I was wondering another aspect of these patches I had here > on this dropped list. > > In the end most of patches that was here will be picked by Greg's > stable scripts anyways. > > Also other patches with cc:stable that were on that round > but got removed: > > commit 1e712535c51a ("drm/i915/dp: Link train Fallback on eDP only if > fallback link BW can fit panel's native mode") According to Manasi earlier in the thread: "I am okay with that w.r.t my patch ("drm/i915/dp: Link train Fallback on eDP only if fallback link BW can fit panel's native mode")" So I think waiting until v4.19 on that one should be fine. > commit 62358aa4ee86 ("drm/i915: Use the correct crtc when sanitizing plane > mapping") > commit 68bc30deac62 ("drm/i915: Restore vblank interrupts earlier") > Can't speak for these two though > Should I add back at least these patches this week? > Or we should really wait for 4.19 to be released? > > Thanks, > Rodrigo. > > > > > On Thu, 2018-10-11 at 09:17 +1000, David Airlie wrote: > > > On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 8:53 AM Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > I need your help to decide what to do with this round of fixes. > > > > > > > > I have collected these patches this week: > > > > > > > > commit b43e8916172a ("drm/i915/dp: Link train Fallback on eDP only if > > > > fallback link BW can fit panel's native mode") > > > > commit 5abb01e541ed ("drm/i915: Fix intel_dp_mst_best_encoder()") > > > > commit 02713246296d ("drm/i915: Skip vcpi allocation for MSTB ports > > > > that > > > > are gone") > > > > commit cc6e027f5f50 ("drm/i915: Don't unset intel_connector- > > > > >mst_port") > > > > commit f5aec50ba21e ("drm/i915: Use the correct crtc when sanitizing > > > > plane > > > > mapping") > > > > commit 6547684bf50a ("drm/i915: Restore vblank interrupts earlier") > > > > > > > > CI_DIF_309 represents Greg's v4.19-rc7 and it is clean. > > > > > > > > However 2 following CI runs are kind of strange. > > > > > > > > There's few underruns here and there, but those looks flip-flops. > > > > > > > > My biggest concern is specially around: > > > > > > > > igt@kms_plane@pixel-format-pipe-a-planes: > > > > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-intel-fixes/shards.html > > > > > > > > > > > > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-intel-fixes/CI_DIF_311/shard-glk8/igt@kms_plane@pixel-format-pipe-c-planes.html > > > > > > > > Thoughts? > > > > > > > > I'm holding the pull request for now and will try to do some local > > > > tests > > > > here > > > > to see if I can identify a culprit. > > > > > > At this late in the game for rc8, unless these fix a major regression > > > in the current tree, I'd say drop them until -next. > > > > > > Dave. > > > > -- > > Cheers, > > Lyude Paul > > -- Cheers, Lyude Paul _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2018-10-15 21:31 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2018-10-10 22:53 drm-intel-fixes CI issues Rodrigo Vivi 2018-10-10 23:17 ` David Airlie 2018-10-10 23:34 ` Lyude Paul 2018-10-11 19:38 ` Manasi Navare 2018-10-15 19:59 ` Lyude Paul 2018-10-15 21:20 ` Rodrigo Vivi 2018-10-15 21:31 ` Lyude Paul
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.