From: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
To: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>,
intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org,
DRI Development <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for Default request/fence expiry + watchdog (rev3)
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2021 14:41:36 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YFiekGrvT25CPEw3@phenom.ffwll.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <39d7d721-4e52-89b2-8efe-54cb7768ec6c@linux.intel.com>
On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 01:37:58PM +0000, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>
> On 19/03/2021 01:17, Patchwork wrote:
>
> Okay with 20s default expiration the hangcheck tests on Tigerlake pass and
> we are left with these failures:
>
> > IGT changes
> >
> >
> > Possible regressions
> >
> > *
> >
> > igt@gem_ctx_ringsize@idle@bcs0:
> >
> > o shard-skl: PASS
> > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_9870/shard-skl10/igt@gem_ctx_ringsize@idle@bcs0.html>
> > -> INCOMPLETE
> > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_19806/shard-skl7/igt@gem_ctx_ringsize@idle@bcs0.html>
>
> Too many runnable requests on a slow Skylake SKU with command parsing
> active. Too many to finish withing the 20s default expiration that is. This
> is actually the same root cause as the below tests tries to explicitly
> demonstrate:
>
> > *
> >
> > {igt@gem_watchdog@far-fence@bcs0} (NEW):
> >
> > o shard-glk: NOTRUN -> FAIL
> > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_19806/shard-glk7/igt@gem_watchdog@far-fence@bcs0.html>
> > *
> >
> > {igt@gem_watchdog@far-fence@vcs0} (NEW):
> >
> > o shard-apl: NOTRUN -> FAIL
> > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_19806/shard-apl1/igt@gem_watchdog@far-fence@vcs0.html>
> > +2 similar issues
> > *
> >
> > {igt@gem_watchdog@far-fence@vecs0} (NEW):
> >
> > o shard-kbl: NOTRUN -> FAIL
> > <https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_19806/shard-kbl7/igt@gem_watchdog@far-fence@vecs0.html>
> > +2 similar issues
>
> The vulnerability default expiration adds compared to the current state is
> applicable to heaviliy loaded systems where GPU is shared between multiple
> clients.
>
> Otherwise series seems to work. Failing tests can be blacklisted going
> forward. Ack to merge and merge itself, after review, I leave to maintainers
> since personally I am not supportive of this mechanism.
Yeah I think we have some leftovers to look at after this has landed on
igt side, since with 20s we're rather long on the timeout side, and some
of the tests need to be resurrected with the preempt-ctx execbuf mode I
think.
-Daniel
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-22 13:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-03-18 17:04 [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v3 0/6] Default request/fence expiry + watchdog Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-03-18 17:04 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/6] drm/i915: Individual request cancellation Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-03-22 15:38 ` Matthew Auld
2021-03-23 9:48 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-03-18 17:04 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/6] drm/i915: Restrict sentinel requests further Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-03-22 17:12 ` Matthew Auld
2021-03-23 9:09 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-03-18 17:04 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/6] drm/i915: Handle async cancellation in sentinel assert Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-03-23 10:09 ` Matthew Auld
2021-03-18 17:04 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 4/6] drm/i915: Request watchdog infrastructure Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-03-22 13:29 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v3 " Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-03-23 10:54 ` Matthew Auld
2021-03-23 11:09 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-03-23 11:40 ` Matthew Auld
2021-03-18 17:04 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 5/6] drm/i915: Fail too long user submissions by default Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-03-23 15:56 ` Matthew Auld
2021-03-18 17:04 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 6/6] drm/i915: Allow configuring default request expiry via modparam Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-03-18 19:07 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for Default request/fence expiry + watchdog (rev3) Patchwork
2021-03-18 19:36 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success " Patchwork
2021-03-19 1:17 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure " Patchwork
2021-03-22 13:37 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-03-22 13:41 ` Daniel Vetter [this message]
2021-03-22 14:05 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for Default request/fence expiry + watchdog (rev4) Patchwork
2021-03-22 14:33 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure " Patchwork
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=YFiekGrvT25CPEw3@phenom.ffwll.local \
--to=daniel@ffwll.ch \
--cc=daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox