Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/dsi: 4th attempt to get rid of IOSF GPIO (rev2)

[Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>]

On Wed, 22 Nov 2023, "Saarinen, Jani" <jani.saarinen@intel.com> wrote:
> Hi, 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Musial, Ewelina <ewelina.musial@intel.com>
>> Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2023 4:25 PM
>> To: Saarinen, Jani <jani.saarinen@intel.com>; Jani Nikula
>> <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>; Illipilli, TejasreeX <tejasreex.illipilli@intel.com>;
>> LGCI Bug Filing <lgci.bug.filing@intel.com>; Andy Shevchenko
>> <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
>> Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
>> Subject: RE: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/dsi: 4th attempt to get rid
>> of IOSF GPIO (rev2)
>> 
>> But this list had only series which were in queue here https://intel-gfx-
>> ci.01.org/queue/index.html and today I was checking exactly how queue for
>> shards is created and there are jobs which are not displayed there. Directly in
>> Jenkins we do have multiple more jobs than in this queue only and I also killed
>> them. I was discussing exactly this case today with Michał and he pointed out that
>> in explanation below queues we do have highlighted:
>> Due to technical limitation this is just an approximation of the queue. It is good
>> for assessing the length of the queue, but should not be considered as
>> completely accurate.
> OK. So could have been in the list but not sure. 

Okay, timeout.

I just pushed the series. I trust Hans' testing here, considering the
likely platform impact of the series and CI coverage of said platforms.

Thanks for the patches and review.

BR,
Jani.



>> 
>> Regards,
>> Ewelina
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Saarinen, Jani <jani.saarinen@intel.com>
>> Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2023 3:04 PM
>> To: Musial, Ewelina <ewelina.musial@intel.com>; Jani Nikula
>> <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>; Illipilli, TejasreeX <tejasreex.illipilli@intel.com>;
>> LGCI Bug Filing <lgci.bug.filing@intel.com>; Andy Shevchenko
>> <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
>> Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
>> Subject: RE: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/dsi: 4th attempt to get rid
>> of IOSF GPIO (rev2)
>> 
>> HI,
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Intel-gfx <intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org> On Behalf Of
>> > Musial, Ewelina
>> > Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2023 3:39 PM
>> > To: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>; Illipilli, TejasreeX
>> > <tejasreex.illipilli@intel.com>; LGCI Bug Filing
>> > <lgci.bug.filing@intel.com>; Andy Shevchenko
>> > <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
>> > Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
>> > Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/dsi: 4th
>> > attempt to get rid of IOSF GPIO (rev2)
>> >
>> > Hi, I reviewed what I could, and my conclusion is that CI.FULL for
>> > this series was killed due to my work around 126526v6 - yesterday I
>> > was asked to do whatever I can to speed up shards testing for
>> > mentioned series and I killed multiple sessions which were higher in
>> > queue. We do not have option to simply bump priority for premerge
>> > series and the only way (not recommended but sometimes needed) is to
>> > drop everything what is higher. I've added this series back to queue.
>> > Sorry for inconvenience
>> Nope. It was not part of that list. We checked that with Jani too. See those
>> pictures we discussed.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Ewelina
>> 
>> Br,
>> Jani S

-- 
Jani Nikula, Intel