Re: ✗ Ro.CI.BAT: failure for Reclassify messages from GuC loader/submission (rev3)

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

On Mon, 05 Sep 2016, Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> On 05/09/16 16:06, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>> On 12/08/16 13:06, Dave Gordon wrote:
>>> On 11/08/16 18:35, Patchwork wrote:
>>>> == Series Details ==
>>>>
>>>> Series: Reclassify messages from GuC loader/submission (rev3)
>>>> URL   : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/10918/
>>>> State : failure
>>>>
>>>> == Summary ==
>>>>
>>>> Series 10918v3 Reclassify messages from GuC loader/submission
>>>> http://patchwork.freedesktop.org/api/1.0/series/10918/revisions/3/mbox
>>>>
>>>> Test gem_exec_suspend:
>>>>         Subgroup basic-s3:
>>>>                 dmesg-warn -> PASS       (ro-bdw-i7-5600u)
>>>> Test kms_cursor_legacy:
>>>>         Subgroup basic-cursor-vs-flip-varying-size:
>>>>                 pass       -> FAIL       (ro-ilk1-i5-650)
>>>
>>> https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96701
>>> [ILK/BSW/APL] [BAT] kms_cursor_legacy some subtest fail with WARNING:
>>> page flip 1 was delayed, missed 23 frames etc.
>>>
>>>>         Subgroup basic-flip-vs-cursor-legacy:
>>>>                 fail       -> PASS       (ro-bdw-i5-5250u)
>>>> Test kms_pipe_crc_basic:
>>>>         Subgroup read-crc-pipe-b-frame-sequence:
>>>>                 fail       -> PASS       (ro-ivb2-i7-3770)
>>>>         Subgroup suspend-read-crc-pipe-a:
>>>>                 dmesg-warn -> SKIP       (ro-bdw-i5-5250u)
>>>>         Subgroup suspend-read-crc-pipe-b:
>>>>                 skip       -> DMESG-WARN (ro-bdw-i5-5250u)
>>>>         Subgroup suspend-read-crc-pipe-c:
>>>>                 skip       -> DMESG-WARN (ro-bdw-i5-5250u)
>>>
>>> Both of these are
>>> https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96614
>>> [BAT BDW] *ERROR* failed to enable link training/failed to start channel
>>> equalization
>>>
>>>> ro-bdw-i5-5250u  total:240  pass:219  dwarn:3   dfail:0   fail:1
>>>> skip:17
>>>> ro-bdw-i7-5557U  total:240  pass:220  dwarn:1   dfail:0   fail:0
>>>> skip:19
>>>> ro-bdw-i7-5600u  total:240  pass:207  dwarn:0   dfail:0   fail:1
>>>> skip:32
>>>> ro-bsw-n3050     total:240  pass:194  dwarn:0   dfail:0   fail:4
>>>> skip:42
>>>> ro-byt-n2820     total:240  pass:197  dwarn:0   dfail:0   fail:3
>>>> skip:40
>>>> ro-hsw-i3-4010u  total:240  pass:214  dwarn:0   dfail:0   fail:0
>>>> skip:26
>>>> ro-hsw-i7-4770r  total:240  pass:185  dwarn:0   dfail:0   fail:0
>>>> skip:55
>>>> ro-ilk1-i5-650   total:235  pass:173  dwarn:0   dfail:0   fail:2
>>>> skip:60
>>>> ro-ivb-i7-3770   total:240  pass:205  dwarn:0   dfail:0   fail:0
>>>> skip:35
>>>> ro-ivb2-i7-3770  total:240  pass:209  dwarn:0   dfail:0   fail:0
>>>> skip:31
>>>> ro-skl3-i5-6260u total:240  pass:222  dwarn:0   dfail:0   fail:4
>>>> skip:14
>>>>
>>>> Results at /archive/results/CI_IGT_test/RO_Patchwork_1841/
>>>>
>>>> 4a26251 drm-intel-nightly: 2016y-08m-11d-16h-12m-42s UTC integration
>>>> manifest
>>>> 773b608 NOMERGE: next version of GuC firmware is 8.11
>>>> e3208ac drm/i915/guc: revisit GuC loader message levels
>>>> 3dc113a drm/i915/guc: downgrade some DRM_ERROR() messages to DRM_WARN()
>>>> 6cd71c4 drm: extra printk() wrapper macros
>>>
>>> So ready for merging :)
>>
>> Merged to dinq, thanks for patches and review!
>
> I've merged the wrong (old) series. :(
>
> So now those three patches need to be removed from dinq. Am I allowed to 
> just pull back the head and force push? Or push reverts?

No force pushes. Either revert and push the right ones, or, if the diff
is reasonable, come up with fixes that have the same end result.

BR,
Jani.


-- 
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Technology Center
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx