[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <58005033-5708-4a3a-a5b1-58898ce3fbac@collabora.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2024 19:27:12 +0530
From: Vignesh Raman <vignesh.raman@...labora.com>
To: Abhinav Kumar <quic_abhinavk@...cinc.com>,
Helen Mae Koike Fornazier <helen.koike@...labora.com>
Cc: Rob Clark <robdclark@...il.com>,
Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>, Sean Paul <sean@...rly.run>,
Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@...ainline.org>,
Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>, Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>,
David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>, Simona Vetter <simona@...ll.ch>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arm-msm <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
freedreno <freedreno@...ts.freedesktop.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/ci: add kms_cursor_legacy@...ture-bo to apq8016
flakes
Hi Abhinav,
On 16/12/24 11:39, Abhinav Kumar wrote:
>
>
> On 12/15/2024 9:45 PM, Vignesh Raman wrote:
>> Hi Abhinav,
>>
>> On 14/12/24 01:09, Abhinav Kumar wrote:
>>> Hi Vignesh
>>>
>>> On 12/11/2024 9:10 PM, Vignesh Raman wrote:
>>>> Hi Abhinav / Helen,
>>>>
>>>> On 12/12/24 01:48, Abhinav Kumar wrote:
>>>>> Hi Helen / Vignesh
>>>>>
>>>>> On 12/4/2024 12:33 PM, Helen Mae Koike Fornazier wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ---- On Wed, 04 Dec 2024 16:21:26 -0300 Abhinav Kumar wrote ---
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > Hi Helen
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > On 12/4/2024 11:14 AM, Helen Mae Koike Fornazier wrote:
>>>>>> > > Hi Abhinav,
>>>>>> > >
>>>>>> > > Thanks for your patch.
>>>>>> > >
>>>>>> > >
>>>>>> > >
>>>>>> > > ---- On Wed, 04 Dec 2024 15:55:17 -0300 Abhinav Kumar wrote
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> > >
>>>>>> > > > From the jobs [1] and [2] of pipeline [3], its clear that
>>>>>> > > > kms_cursor_legacy@...ture-bo is most certainly a flake and
>>>>>> > > > not a fail for apq8016. Mark the test accordingly to
>>>>>> match the results.
>>>>>> > > >
>>>>>> > > > [1] :
>>>>>> https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/msm/-/jobs/67676481
>>>>
>>>> The test passes -
>>>> kms_cursor_legacy@...ture-bo,UnexpectedImprovement(Pass)
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, thats the problem
>>>
>>> https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/msm/-/jobs/67676481/viewer#L2696
>>>
>>> 24-12-04 03:51:55 R SERIAL> [ 179.241309] [IGT] kms_cursor_legacy:
>>> finished subtest all-pipes, SUCCESS
>>> 24-12-04 03:51:55 R SERIAL> [ 179.241812] [IGT] kms_cursor_legacy:
>>> finished subtest torture-bo, SUCCESS
>>>
>>> Here it passes whereas it was marked a failure. Hence pipeline fails.
>>
>> Yes it fails due to,
>>
>> Unexpected results:
>> kms_cursor_legacy@...ture-bo,UnexpectedImprovement(Pass)
>>
>> In this case, we need to remove this test from fails.txt
>>
>>>
>>>>>> > > > [2] :
>>>>>> https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/msm/-/jobs/67677430
>>>>
>>>> There are no test failures
>>>>
>>>
>>> No, thats not true
>>>
>>> https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/msm/-/jobs/67677430/viewer#L2694
>>>
>>> 24-12-04 04:18:38 R SERIAL> [ 170.379649] Console: switching to
>>> colour dummy device 80x25
>>> 24-12-04 04:18:38 R SERIAL> [ 170.379938] [IGT] kms_cursor_legacy:
>>> executing
>>> 24-12-04 04:18:38 R SERIAL> [ 170.393868] [IGT] kms_cursor_legacy:
>>> starting subtest torture-bo
>>> 24-12-04 04:18:38 R SERIAL> [ 170.394186] [IGT] kms_cursor_legacy:
>>> starting dynamic subtest pipe-A
>>> 24-12-04 04:18:38 R SERIAL> [ 170.661749] [IGT] kms_cursor_legacy:
>>> finished subtest pipe-A, FAIL
>>> 24-12-04 04:18:38 R SERIAL> [ 170.662060] [IGT] kms_cursor_legacy:
>>> starting dynamic subtest all-pipes
>>> 24-12-04 04:18:38 R SERIAL> [ 170.713237] [IGT] kms_cursor_legacy:
>>> finished subtest all-pipes, FAIL
>>> 24-12-04 04:18:38 R SERIAL> [ 170.713513] [IGT] kms_cursor_legacy:
>>> finished subtest torture-bo, FAIL
>>> 24-12-04 04:18:38 R SERIAL> [ 170.721263] [IGT] kms_cursor_legacy:
>>> exiting, ret=98
>>> 24-12-04 04:18:38 R SERIAL> [ 170.737857] Console: switching to
>>> colour frame buffer device 128x48
>>>
>>> Please check these logs, the torture-bo test-case did fail. The
>>> pipeline was marked pass because it was an expected fail.
>>>
>>> So we have two pipelines, where one failed and the other passed. So
>>> thats a flake for me.
>>
>> Yes agree. So if we had removed the test from fails, deqp-runner would
>> have reported this as flake.
>>
>> deqp-runner runs the test and if it fails, it retries. If the test
>> passes on retry, it is reported as a flake.
>>
>>>
>>>>>> > > > [3]:
>>>>>> https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/msm/-/pipelines/1322770
>>>>
>>>> The job is same as 2
>>>>
>>>> In this case, the test passes and deqp-runner does not report it as
>>>> flake. So we only need to remove it from fails file.
>>>>
>>>
>>> No, like I mentioned above we have a pass and a fail.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> > > >
>>>>>> > > > Signed-off-by: Abhinav Kumar quic_abhinavk@...cinc.com>
>>>>>> > > > ---
>>>>>> > > > drivers/gpu/drm/ci/xfails/msm-apq8016-flakes.txt | 5 +++++
>>>>>> > > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>>>>>> > > >
>>>>>> > > > diff --git
>>>>>> a/drivers/gpu/drm/ci/xfails/msm-apq8016-flakes.txt
>>>>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/ci/xfails/msm-apq8016-flakes.txt
>>>>>> > > > new file mode 100644
>>>>>> > > > index 000000000000..18639853f18f
>>>>>> > > > --- /dev/null
>>>>>> > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/ci/xfails/msm-apq8016-flakes.txt
>>>>>> > > > @@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
>>>>>> > > > +# Board Name: msm-apq8016-db410c
>>>>>> > > > +# Failure Rate: 100
>>>>>> > >
>>>>>> > > Is failure rate is 100%, isn't it a fail than?
>>>>>> > > (I know we have other cases with Failure Rate: 100, maybe we
>>>>>> should fix them as well)
>>>>>> > >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Maybe I misunderstood the meaning of "Failure rate" for a flake.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > I interpreted this as this test being flaky 100% of the time :)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ah right, I see, inside deqp-runner (that auto-retries).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'd like to hear Vignesh's opinion on this.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (In any case, we probably should document this better)
>>>>
>>>> deqp-runner reports new (not present in flakes file) or known
>>>> (present in flakes file) flakes
>>>>
>>>> 2024-12-11 07:25:44.709666: Some new flakes found:
>>>> 2024-12-11 07:25:44.709676: kms_lease@...e-flip-implicit-plane
>>>>
>>>> 2024-12-11 13:15:16.482890: Some known flakes found:
>>>> 2024-12-11 13:15:16.482898:
>>>> kms_async_flips@...nc-flip-with-page-flip-events-atomic
>>>>
>>>> we add it to flakes file if deqp runner reports new flakes. Another
>>>> case where we update flake tests is when a test passes in one run
>>>> but fails in another, but deqp-runner does not report it as flake.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Vignesh
>>>>
>>>
>>> The confusion here i guess is about what to mention as a "Failure rate"
>>>
>>> Failure rate means how many times it fails (like normally) ? In that
>>> case 100% which I used is wrong and I used 33% instead for which I
>>> have pushed v2.
>>
>> Yes, 33% is correct and please remove this test from fails.txt
>>
>> Regards,
>> Vignesh
>>
>
> Ack, let me remove this test from fails and keep it only in flakes.
Can you remove it from the fails without adding it to the flakes, and
rerun the pipeline a few times to see if deqp-runner reports it as a flake?
Thanks.
Regards,
Vignesh
>
> Thanks
>
> Abhinav
>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Helen
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Can you let me know which way we need to go?
>>>>>
>>>>> Just in case I did post a v2 fixing this,
>>>>> https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/627276/
>>>>>
>>>>> If thats the way to go, can you pls take a look?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>
>>>>> Abhinav
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Out of the 3 runs of the test, it passed 2/3 times and failed
>>>>>> 1/3.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > So its fail % actually is 33.33% in that case.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > I think I saw a Failure rate of 100% on
>>>>>> msm-sm8350-hdk-flakes.txt and
>>>>>> > mistook that as the rate at which flakes are seen.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Let me fix this up as 33%
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > > Regards,
>>>>>> > > Helen
>>>>>> > >
>>>>>> > > > +# IGT Version: 1.28-ga73311079
>>>>>> > > > +# Linux Version: 6.12.0-rc2
>>>>>> > > > +kms_cursor_legacy@...ture-bo
>>>>>> > > >
>>>>>> > > > ---
>>>>>> > > > base-commit: 798bb342e0416d846cf67f4725a3428f39bfb96b
>>>>>> > > > change-id: 20241204-cursor_tor_skip-9d128dd62c4f
>>>>>> > > >
>>>>>> > > > Best regards,
>>>>>> > > > --
>>>>>> > > > Abhinav Kumar quic_abhinavk@...cinc.com>
>>>>>> > > >
>>>>>> > > >
>>>>>> > >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists