<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/" /> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_ASSIGNED " title="ASSIGNED --- - [HSW ULT]igt/pc8 skipped" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=69838#c6">Comment # 6</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_ASSIGNED " title="ASSIGNED --- - [HSW ULT]igt/pc8 skipped" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=69838">bug 69838</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:daniel@ffwll.ch" title="Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>"> Daniel Vetter</a> <pre>(In reply to <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=69838#c5">comment #5</a>) > If we replace the SKIP with FAIL on machines that are not properly > configured we'll start getting bug reports that are not really bugs and we > won't be able to fix. We'll also have to always analyze the logs to check if > the report is really a regression or if it's just a badly configured machine. And I absolutely want these bug reports. You're right that misconfigured test machines isn't our bug, but we need to notice such issues, track and fix them. I think adding a QA component in our internal JIRA would be good for that, I'll chat with Gavin about this. So yes, if a test can't work because the machine is misconfigured it should fail, not skip. That's how all the other testcase already work, and occasionally we get a bug report which isn't a kernel issue but a setup issue. The other option of silently not testing features (which is currently the case, at least according to QA's nightly test db there's not a single machine where the pc8 tests are executed).</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the QA Contact for the bug.</li> <li>You are on the CC list for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>