Re: [PATCH RFC] drm/i915: Print dmesg warn on unintended hangs

[Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com>]

Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> writes:

> Quoting Mika Kuoppala (2017-11-10 12:20:55)
>> Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> writes:
>> 
>> > Quoting Mika Kuoppala (2017-11-10 11:53:47)
>> >> We have a problem of distinguishing intended hangs
>> >> submitted by igt during CI/bat and hangs that are nonintended
>> >> happening in close proximity.
>> >
>> > Do we? I haven't had that problem in distinguishing them.
>> 
>> Piglit can't tell them apart afaik. Due to info level.
>
> Piglit? If the test passes, it doesn't matter how the kernel got there,
> the user behaviour is as expected. If the test wants to assert that it
> didn't hang, it can do that.

Through reset counts? At starters we could assert in framework that
all tests that do not call igt_hang() expect reset count to
stay the same between entry/exit.

I see the logic behind that user behaviour is as expected.

Would be good that CI folks chime in here and detail how
they want things to work.

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