[Bug 104008] [BAT][CI] igt@* - fail - Failed assertion: poll(&pfd, 1, 0) == 1

[bugzilla-daemon at freedesktop.org]

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104008

Martin Peres <martin.peres at free.fr> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Resolution|WORKSFORME                  |---
             Status|RESOLVED                    |REOPENED

--- Comment #16 from Martin Peres <martin.peres at free.fr> ---
(In reply to Chris Wilson from comment #15)
> prime_vgem/basic-fence-flip timing loop was rewritten and should avoid this
> problem
> 
> commit f43bb29c3e29143d8ad5fc70b82eccf5749d3958
> Author: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
> Date:   Thu Apr 4 08:01:04 2019 +0100
> 
>     prime_vgem: Downgrade the severity of a single missed vblank on flipping
>     
>     Not displaying the flip on the next vblank is bad, but not the end of
>     the world -- so long as that is only a temporary glitch. Give the vblank
>     a few more frames to complete, and warn instead of failing if it takes
>     more than one vblank interval to flip.
>     
>     v2: Bump the warning to >1 missed flip, to spare us the noise.
>     
>     Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
>     Reviewed-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter at ffwll.ch>
> 
> commit f539e21e934019f0196fee646f351b4e30a8c341
> Author: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
> Date:   Mon Apr 1 08:55:20 2019 +0100
> 
>     prime_vgem: Replace nanosleep with igt_waitchildren_timeout
>     
>     We want to use a child in order to detect an uninterruptable sleep (a
>     potential bug we might hit), but we can use igt_waitchildren_timeout()
>     to replace our risky self-signaling + nanosleep.
>     
>     v2: Remove the now redundant signal() setup.
>     
>     Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103182
>     Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
>     Reviewed-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter at ffwll.ch>

Thanks! Last failure seen was 8 days ago, so we'll monitor that.

However, I am lazy and I don't want to write another bug report for the other
failures, so let's repurpose this bug for the other issue:

https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/drmtip_250/fi-bsw-n3050/igt@kms_cursor_legacy@long-nonblocking-modeset-vs-cursor-atomic.html

Starting subtest: long-nonblocking-modeset-vs-cursor-atomic
(kms_cursor_legacy:2734) CRITICAL: Test assertion failure function
nonblocking_modeset_vs_cursor, file ../tests/kms_cursor_legacy.c:837:
(kms_cursor_legacy:2734) CRITICAL: Failed assertion: 0 == poll(&pfd, 1, 0)
(kms_cursor_legacy:2734) CRITICAL: Last errno: 25, Inappropriate ioctl for
device
(kms_cursor_legacy:2734) CRITICAL: error: 0 != 1

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx-bugs/attachments/20190412/b891a516/attachment-0001.html>