renesas/master bisection: igt-kms-rockchip.kms_vblank.pipe-A-wait-forked on rk3399-gru-kevin

[Guillaume Tucker]

Hi Mark,

Maybe you could retrieve the original thread and rely to it with
the report?  That's the ideal way of following up on a patch I
think.  You can get the mbox file this way:

./kci_bisect get_mbox \
  --commit ca871659ec1606d33b1e76de8d4cf924cf627e34 \
  --kdir ~/src/linux


On 14/12/2022 11:06, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Mark,
> 
> Thanks for your report!
> 
> On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 5:58 PM Mark Brown <broonie at kernel.org> wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 05:56:30AM -0800, KernelCI bot wrote:
>> The KernelCI bisection bot found regressions in at least two KMS tests
>> in the Renesas tree on rk3399-gru-kevin just after the Renesas tree
>> merged up mainline:
>>
>>    igt-kms-rockchip.kms_vblank.pipe-A-wait-forked
>>    igt-kms-rockchip.kms_vblank.pipe-A-query-busy
>>
>> which it bisected to ca871659ec16 ("drm/bridge: analogix_dp: Support
>> PSR-exit to disable transition").  I'm not *100%* sure I trust the
>> bisection but it sure is suspicous that two separate bisects for related
>> issues landed on the same commit.
> 
> ... which is an old commit, added in v5.19-rc2, and which did not
> enter through the renesas tree at all?

Do you mean this report shouldn't have been sent to you?

FYI The renesas tree got rebased and inherited a regression which
got bisected.  The same thing probably happened to other trees.
Yes it would be good to have 2nd order regressions based on a
reference branch (e.g. mainline in this case) in KernelCI but
that's for next year.  Regardless, it found a commit and the
bisection looks legit.

>> Below is the full report for the bisect for the first test, the bisect
>> for the latter looks identical.  It's got links to full logs for the
>> test run and a Reported-by for the bot - I do see some backtraces from
>> userspace in the output, the first is:
>>
>> | IGT-Version: 1.26-gf8a4a0b (aarch64) (Linux: 6.1.0 aarch64)
>> | <14>[   35.444448] [IGT] drm_read: starting subtest short-buffer-wakeup
>> | Starting subtest: short-buffer-wakeup
>> |
>> | (| drm_read:350) CRITICAL: Test assertion failure function generate_event, file ../tests/drm_read.c:65:
>> | (drm_read:350) CRITICAL: <14>[   36.155642] [IGT] drm_read: exiting, ret=98
>> | Failed assertion: kmstest_get_vblank(fd, pipe, DRM_VBLANK_EVENT)
>> |
>> | (drm_read:350) CRITICAL: Last errno: 22, Invalid argument
>> | Stack trace:
>> |
>> |   #0 ../lib/igt_core.c:1933 __igt_fail_assert()
>> |   #1 [<unknown>+0xd5362770]
>> |   #2 [<unknown>+0xd536193c]
>> |   #3 [__libc_start_main+0xe8]
>> |   #4 [<unknown>+0xd5361974]
>> |   #5 [<unknown<6>[   36.162851] Console: switching to colour frame buffer device 300x100>+0xd5361974]
>> | Subtest short-buffer-wakeup failed.
>>
>> Unfortunately we don't have current results from mainline or -next.

Thanks,
Guillaume