From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (gabe.freedesktop.org [131.252.210.177]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B785FC282D0 for ; Fri, 7 Mar 2025 08:14:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4814A10EAFD; Fri, 7 Mar 2025 08:14:23 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: gabe.freedesktop.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ursulin-net.20230601.gappssmtp.com header.i=@ursulin-net.20230601.gappssmtp.com header.b="XSLZfpYw"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from mail-wr1-f48.google.com (mail-wr1-f48.google.com [209.85.221.48]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 89CBE10EAFD for ; Fri, 7 Mar 2025 08:14:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wr1-f48.google.com with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-390e88caa4dso839847f8f.1 for ; Fri, 07 Mar 2025 00:14:18 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ursulin-net.20230601.gappssmtp.com; s=20230601; t=1741335257; x=1741940057; darn=lists.freedesktop.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:content-language :references:cc:to:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=6exokFfEuSQFFMOocWbnkCBpbbz+ko6+noHbubiPbgc=; b=XSLZfpYwdQH9nve4qe/m57IAbZuTx1SjCHZDwwiMWo15zltJzYcA9ZYe+jphMlme5P 6jLG/ZWNN5N47e5WzoSPaqMPIljRUR41utisq14HR0kByJIUeQrrl2MCPcpR3NCIHs9V QIi5amZNC1uTXfqsS32jVtTyXN5SHvORG4x4aweLZ8QbPpQ7L0JelphqXL6k9hzyVTvZ mjQa8Jf/SnZwzjG8eN68awy/pH1vTSeksixXHIwgg5FQJ0eQ0wvnV1P01LdKDoBTWxXS NUSZD095AWoTLW1BP7vZthGOI5t0dOS3lLvQqZtlOESoZgq/mGoqRP+2ASlaFw0n8eXm sTiw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1741335257; x=1741940057; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:content-language :references:cc:to:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=6exokFfEuSQFFMOocWbnkCBpbbz+ko6+noHbubiPbgc=; b=Osx0qxv9dPpVK5pjqUxcCOjXI8QP5e/2einCeuuRswzT1wCKYr6gx9bA+iXX+gnlka iEH3bVWFm0SOXLKo+tHqm6OmK0iobObTuMwNRbsn12pv6ZHiXfzCvz8tLrZ6M/oJv7gG evjy2/r/UD4PJJBIcD0k/ISCUZsAwC5HtKw/BkRn6qODX7DMZg43ZpeqvmbC30oAXGLY EtlHNmzLEfclgcvsbjjynJ/paEzpb3krKRxS8tU77HIBCQ4Gp+D8J1gzRzUV6BNPpBZA +TBWJ448050VTQZNQoX28Lc6zp9MB45qrQSUObSe+OmzaanZwwJ9yn49hKsd8jLOM7Ce 17gg== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCU4B64DitIGwWN1CCmhMpBzMuWKiSr5GjzHTUhn6hE5PoRnOWdNezDg3+TH9UuRkSQYbcC7HYmdydQ=@lists.freedesktop.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyxeYtmmdsOZrLN8a0IEN6aZOYYj+6MsPu8ydsqAJoNVlIvJHyB mPAUaKaZTwS2jL5jQB+X+p0AjJwSmGPLBrD7D4ZUrjS1rn6290Jsj3SVSrN0Lp8= X-Gm-Gg: ASbGnctBBu/1WgfMp7OkuY65A/aRE6Qb4w9CSmm7XPsuSIL+Q/wjpkV6JnkJGnzyMTP aGO8xDRScSYH8ZanRhb0EVA97zyRL6qdGasoSYaBhO48g28YACKAq8FdJrLfk0aqqw3F6m4EAiF voQibSC1+xLZ7W1VGlHKptl8pNZqxMagzEpdrC+1cD4s30U+/knhu61FIvcoPw6NeQ3FRgvdtgN v/JKY+fc77zhmgo156Rd+v6YtmCg1SAzkJ6WmF0FxC/GboXCO+G9DJs9RX1T+0GWpqNGIBDsZik lZzH6iOXUs1k/KoL5CzwIVlar0oPUqS3cafTRcAGsTsIZHHAFjdr76nN9ZoV X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFcitgTWJ6XKjzvVTkjMqtc6z/dbdB1zD94W/KYIBCJxdWne6TOE611EHfpUeBVBsl0KabPaQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:2c7:b0:38f:451b:653c with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-39132d77a3bmr1117175f8f.7.1741335256760; Fri, 07 Mar 2025 00:14:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.0.101] ([90.241.98.187]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ffacd0b85a97d-3912bfdfdb9sm4529411f8f.27.2025.03.07.00.14.15 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 07 Mar 2025 00:14:16 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2025 08:14:14 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH] i915/gt/selftest_lrc: Remove timestamp test To: Chris Wilson , Mikolaj Wasiak , intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org Cc: Andi Shyti , Krzysztof Karas , chris.p.wilson@intel.com References: <3aa4a0a8-1668-40e4-a57d-5bd983af5ba5@ursulin.net> <174125743728.766812.11198274438700228285@DEV-409> Content-Language: en-GB From: Tvrtko Ursulin In-Reply-To: <174125743728.766812.11198274438700228285@DEV-409> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Intel graphics driver community testing & development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "Intel-gfx" On 06/03/2025 10:37, Chris Wilson wrote: > Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2025-03-04 16:43:45) >> >> On 04/03/2025 13:09, Mikolaj Wasiak wrote: >>> This test exposes bug in tigerlake hardware which prevents it from >>> succeeding. Since the tested feature is only available on bugged hardware >>> and we won't support any new hardware, this test is obsolete and >>> should be removed. >> >> I randomly clicked on one TGL, one DG2, one MTL and one RKL in the CI >> and only saw test passes. Then I looked at the patch below to see if >> there is a skip condition but don't see one. So I end up confused since >> commit message is making it sound like this only exists on Tigerlake and >> it's failing all the time. Is it perhaps a sporadic failure? On all >> platforms or just TGL? What am I missing? > > The HW issue affects all gen12 platforms currently supported by i915. I > don't have any data for derivatives, so I cannot confirm if this bug was > fixed. The lrc_timestamp test was written to demonstrate this HW bug, to > isolate it from (and explain) the pphwsp runtime discrepancies, covered > by another selftest. The question is whether we want to keep a selftest > that is expected to sporadically fail, that exists purely to hunt for > those failures. > > In the past, we have kept such selftests, but hidden them behind > !IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DRM_I915_SELFTEST_BROKEN). > > So, > - keep the selftest and expect sporadic failures in BAT, or Up to Intel - it's not the first sporadically failing test and in the past at least those were handled. > - remove the selftest and completely forget about the HW issue, or > - hide the selftest and stop it running on known bad platforms? Either of these two are also fine I think, as long as, if the removal is chosen, it is made sure that either we already have the comment briefly explaining the above somewhere in code, at a suitable location, or that a brief comment is added with the removal. And commit message improved to be less misleading about the failure frequency. Regards, Tvrtko