<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/"> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - [CI][SHARDS] igt@gem_eio@in-flight-*-(10ms|1us|immediate) - fail - Failed assertion: elapsed < 250e6" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=107799#c8">Comment # 8</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - [CI][SHARDS] igt@gem_eio@in-flight-*-(10ms|1us|immediate) - fail - Failed assertion: elapsed < 250e6" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=107799">bug 107799</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:martin.peres@free.fr" title="Martin Peres <martin.peres@free.fr>"> Martin Peres</a> <pre>Danvet's take on this: <danvet> so a few options seem reasonable: <danvet> 1) fix test assumptions (if those are wrong) <danvet> 2) fix test (maybe needs SCHED_RT) <danvet> 3) fix env (maybe we need -rt kernels, but i915 is anything but -rt compliant) <mupuf> 4) bump the GPU and CPU clocks if PM is slowing you down <danvet> 5) fix kernel (not the first dead/livelock we've seen) <danvet> 6) Adrinael's suggestion of moving the check around so we can have more coverage on other issues before we blow up on this <danvet> 7) don't care <danvet> re-running doesn't seem to be reasonable ever <dolphin> yeah, because world is black and white <dolphin> I'll go with the 7, and do something productive <danvet> atm choice seems to be 7), which is not great if applied to igt at large <danvet> because that's the tragedy of the commons problem <danvet> it's always all the other people's 2% floppy tests :-)</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are on the CC list for the bug.</li> <li>You are the QA Contact for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>