Re: ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/psr: Get pipe id following atomic guidelines (rev2)

[Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>]

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 03:04:40PM +0200, Martin Peres wrote:
> 
> 
> On 29/11/2018 19:36, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 11:52:49PM -0800, Saarinen, Jani wrote:
> >> Hi, 
> >>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: Intel-gfx [mailto:intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org] On Behalf Of
> >>> Rodrigo Vivi
> >>> Sent: torstai 29. marraskuuta 2018 8.18
> >>> To: Souza, Jose <jose.souza@intel.com>
> >>> Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> >>> Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/psr: Get pipe id
> >>> following atomic guidelines (rev2)
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 02:13:12PM -0800, Souza, Jose wrote:
> >>>> On Wed, 2018-11-28 at 21:02 +0000, Patchwork wrote:
> >>>>> == Series Details ==
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Series: drm/i915/psr: Get pipe id following atomic guidelines (rev2)
> >>>>> URL   : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/53132/
> >>>>> State : failure
> >>>>>
> >>>>> == Summary ==
> >>>>>
> >>>>> CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_5216 -> Patchwork_10934
> >>>>> ====================================================
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Summary
> >>>>> -------
> >>>>>
> >>>>>   **FAILURE**
> >>>>>
> >>>>>   Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_10934 absolutely
> >>>>> need to be
> >>>>>   verified manually.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>   If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the
> >>>>> changes
> >>>>>   introduced in Patchwork_10934, please notify your bug team to
> >>>>> allow them
> >>>>>   to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false
> >>>>> positives in CI.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>   External URL:
> >>>>> https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/api/1.0/series/53132/revisions/2/m
> >>>>> box/
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Possible new issues
> >>>>> -------------------
> >>>>>
> >>>>>   Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in
> >>>>> Patchwork_10934:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ### IGT changes ###
> >>>>>
> >>>>> #### Possible regressions ####
> >>>>>
> >>>>>   * igt@i915_selftest@live_sanitycheck:
> >>>>>     - fi-apl-guc:         PASS -> DMESG-WARN
> >>>>>
> >>>>>   * {igt@runner@aborted}:
> >>>>>     - fi-apl-guc:         NOTRUN -> FAIL
> >>>>
> >>>> Both are pretty much non related with display, what do you think
> >>>> Rodrigo? It is a merge blocker?
> >>>
> >>> I got addicted to see all green on CI. So I always prefer to trigger a retest. So
> >>> anyone following the link that is merged with the patch doens't have to
> >>> understand and analyze why it was merged with BAT failure.
> >>>
> >>> I just triggered the re-test for this patch.
> >> Martin, Arek, fyi, not preferred? 
> > 
> > Yes, I'd like to hear their opinion.
> > 
> > On this case a simple BAT would be enough because we don't have PSR monitors
> > on shrd ones.
> > However most of the times trigger the retest is unavoidable because we need
> > to make it to pass BAT and go for the full run.
> > 
> > Besides the green-report-link reason I exposed above.
> 
> I agree that we should only push stuff when CI is green.
> 
> However, using the re-try button is the wrong way as it requires more
> machine time, and it may hide low-probably issues introduced by the patch.
> 
> Instead, we should file/edit bugs and then ask cibuglog to re-send the
> report. I have been doing this ofr a couple of people already, but we
> need to advertise this more!

This makes total sense for me. But I wonder if we don't need at least
one re-run.

My feeling is that if we tell people to file bugs and regenerate
reports they might just end up accidentally ignoring regressions that
was caused by their own patches.

But anyway is there a doc with step-by-step instructions anywhere that
we could learn from and start doing this without overwhelming a single
person?

Thanks a lot!

> 
> Martin
> 
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Rodrigo.
> > 
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Rodrigo.
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Known issues
> >>>>> ------------
> >>>>>
> >>>>>   Here are the changes found in Patchwork_10934 that come from known
> >>>>> issues:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ### IGT changes ###
> >>>>>
> >>>>> #### Issues hit ####
> >>>>>
> >>>>>   * igt@i915_selftest@live_hangcheck:
> >>>>>     - fi-kbl-7560u:       PASS -> INCOMPLETE [fdo#108044]
> >>>>>
> >>>>>   * igt@kms_pipe_crc_basic@read-crc-pipe-a:
> >>>>>     - fi-byt-clapper:     PASS -> FAIL [fdo#107362]
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>   {name}: This element is suppressed. This means it is ignored when
> >>>>> computing
> >>>>>           the status of the difference (SUCCESS, WARNING, or
> >>>>> FAILURE).
> >>>>>
> >>>>>   [fdo#107362]: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=107362
> >>>>>   [fdo#108044]: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=108044
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Participating hosts (50 -> 44)
> >>>>> ------------------------------
> >>>>>
> >>>>>   Missing    (6): fi-kbl-soraka fi-ilk-m540 fi-hsw-4200u fi-byt-
> >>>>> squawks fi-bsw-cyan fi-ctg-p8600
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Build changes
> >>>>> -------------
> >>>>>
> >>>>>     * Linux: CI_DRM_5216 -> Patchwork_10934
> >>>>>
> >>>>>   CI_DRM_5216: 2236cef56d19627516af1f1b19b155d65fbc9834 @
> >>>>> git://anongit.freedesktop.org/gfx-ci/linux
> >>>>>   IGT_4735: b05c028ccdb6ac8e8d8499a041bb14dfe358ee26 @
> >>>>> git://anongit.freedesktop.org/xorg/app/intel-gpu-tools
> >>>>>   Patchwork_10934: 2ebde49b2d0906d8106b020a2b0480bc5f552a01 @
> >>>>> git://anongit.freedesktop.org/gfx-ci/linux
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> == Linux commits ==
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 2ebde49b2d09 drm/i915/psr: Get pipe id following atomic guidelines
> >>>>>
> >>>>> == Logs ==
> >>>>>
> >>>>> For more details see:
> >>>>> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_10934/
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Intel-gfx mailing list
> >>> Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> >>> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx