Re: [PATCH i-g-t] Add dmesg capture and dumping to tests and a test for it.

From: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>
To: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>,
	Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>,
	Intel graphics driver community testing & development
	<intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	Thomas Wood <thomas.wood@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH i-g-t] Add dmesg capture and dumping to tests and a test for it.
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2015 13:22:51 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1448018571.4983.1.camel@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKMK7uGFAvwBK+dZ7Pr=B64Z3ak8d7VC0cJM-vo=6Awcr2zjeQ@mail.gmail.com>

On to, 2015-11-19 at 10:41 +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 10:38 AM, Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 05:32:59PM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 04:44:20PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 03:22:23PM +0200, Joonas Lahtinen
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > Cc: Thomas Wood <thomas.wood@intel.com>
> > > > > Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> > > > > Cc: Damien Lespiau <damien.lespiau@intel.com>
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Joonas Lahtinen <
> > > > > joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>
> > > > 
> > > > Given that we have all that in piglit already the commit
> > > > message is a bit
> > > > thin on justification. Why do we need this in igt too? How does
> > > > this
> > > > interact with the piglit dmesg capture?
> > > 
> > > It's doesn't interfere with anyone else parsing kmsg/dmesg for
> > > themselves, but it adds very useful functionality to standalone
> > > igt.
> > > Which to me is significantly more valuable and I have been
> > > patching it
> > > into igt for over a year and wished it was taken more seriously
> > > given
> > > the number of incorrect bug reports generated.
> > 
> > Ah, the "It doesn't interfere ..." is the crucial part I missed, I
> > didn't
> > know you could read dmesg in parallel without eating message for
> > other
> > consumers. Jonaas, with the above used as commit message (or
> > something
> > similar) this is Acked-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
> 
> Ok, I need to retract this. piglit does some dmesg filtering, how do
> we make sure these two definitions of what's considered failing dmesg
> noise match up?

I would move that decision to I-G-T, and just let piglit interpret the
FAIL (KMSG) status. Currently my proposal is that any LOG_NOTICE or
higher priority message (in any facility) causes the test to fail.

Regards, Joonas

> -Daniel
-- 
Joonas Lahtinen
Open Source Technology Center
Intel Corporation

_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx