[Intel-gfx] ✗ failure: Fi.CI.BAT

Daniel Vetter daniel at ffwll.ch
Wed Jan 13 01:39:27 PST 2016

Argh, actually add Annie/Jesse!

On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 10:39 AM, Daniel Vetter <daniel at ffwll.ch> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 10:20 AM, Mika Kuoppala
> <mika.kuoppala at linux.intel.com> wrote:
>>> But what with all the pass->dmesg-warn changes above? That's considered
>>> BAT failure too, we can't afford to sprinkle warnings all over ... And
>>> it's a bunch of different machines.
>> Forgot to address this one in previous mail. This patchset
>> added more debug infra and enabled it for bsw/byt. So assumpion
>> is that it did uncover a real problem thus the warns.
>> Is the policy that if your debug infra reveals problems,
>> you need to fix those problems?
> We should discuss this in the next meeting (adding Annie/Jesse for
> that), but personally I think adding new WARN/ERROR noise should never
> result in BAT regressions. If your patch uncovers existing failures
> even in BAT then imo the right approach is to first fix up things,
> then apply the WARN patch to make sure we don't break things. The
> problem is that once you have dmesg noise in a test, then no one will
> notice additional noise and regressions. And that's how we got into
> our mess last summer.
> Also dmesg noise is not really acceptable anyway and needs to be fixed
> (Linus/Dave will get grumpy).
> If that takes too long because there's lots of warn, then maybe we
> need to first add the new sanity check at debug level, just to help
> with tracking down issues. We might need to improve CI reporting so
> that debug level dmesg is still capture completely for BAT runs.
>> If so, there is a chicken and egg problem as you don't
>> always have access to hardware that your debug infra
>> will cover.
> Yeah, we need to enable manual submission to CI-machines. Abusing CI
> as a test facility simply means that you're ok with blocking everyone
> else with your CI result spam.
> -Daniel
> --
> Daniel Vetter
> Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
> +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch

Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch

More information about the Intel-gfx mailing list