[Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t] tests/kms_frontbuffer_tracking: increase FBC wait timeout to 5s

Paulo Zanoni paulo.r.zanoni at intel.com
Mon Aug 7 14:54:09 UTC 2017


Em Seg, 2017-08-07 às 06:51 +0000, Lofstedt, Marta escreveu:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Zanoni, Paulo R
> > Sent: Friday, August 4, 2017 9:56 PM
> > To: Lofstedt, Marta <marta.lofstedt at intel.com>; intel-
> > gfx at lists.freedesktop.org
> > Cc: Latvala, Petri <petri.latvala at intel.com>
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH i-g-t] tests/kms_frontbuffer_tracking: increase
> > FBC wait
> > timeout to 5s
> > 
> > Em Sex, 2017-08-04 às 09:47 +0000, Lofstedt, Marta escreveu:
> > > +Paolo
> > > 
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Lofstedt, Marta
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2017 2:17 PM
> > > > To: intel-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org
> > > > Cc: Latvala, Petri <petri.latvala at intel.com>; Lofstedt, Marta
> > > > <marta.lofstedt at intel.com>
> > > > Subject: [PATCH i-g-t] tests/kms_frontbuffer_tracking: increase
> > > > FBC
> > > > wait timeout to 5s
> > > > 
> > > > The subtests: igt at kms_frontbuffer_tracking@fbc-*draw*
> > > > has non-consistent results, pending between fail and pass.
> > > > The fails are always due to "FBC disabled".
> > > > With this increase in timeout the flip-flop behavior is no
> > > > longer
> > > > reproducible.
> > 
> > This is a partial revert of:
> > 
> > 64590c7b768dc8d8dd962f812d5ff5a39e7e8b54
> >     kms_frontbuffer_tracking: reduce the FBC wait timeout to 2s
> > 
> > (but there's no need to make it a full revert if you don't need)
> > 
> > It would be nice to investigate why we're needing 5 seconds instead
> > of
> > 2 now, the document it in the commit message. Also document that
> > this is a
> > partial revert.
> 
> Paulo, do you have data backing up that 2 seconds was ever OK, I fail
> ~1/10 on various fbc subtests. 

All the data I have is the commit message of 64590c7b and the testing I
did. I would imagine something changed in the upstream tree since then,
causing this to need a longer timeout, that's why I suggested
investigating.

> 
> /Marta
> > 
> > Acked-by: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni at intel.com>
> > 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> > > > 
> > > > Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=101623
> > > > Signed-off-by: Marta Lofstedt <marta.lofstedt at intel.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >  tests/kms_frontbuffer_tracking.c | 2 +-
> > > >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > > 
> > > > diff --git a/tests/kms_frontbuffer_tracking.c
> > > > b/tests/kms_frontbuffer_tracking.c
> > > > index c24e4a81..8bec5d5a 100644
> > > > --- a/tests/kms_frontbuffer_tracking.c
> > > > +++ b/tests/kms_frontbuffer_tracking.c
> > > > @@ -923,7 +923,7 @@ static bool fbc_stride_not_supported(void)
> > > > 
> > > >  static bool fbc_wait_until_enabled(void)  {
> > > > -	return igt_wait(fbc_is_enabled(), 2000, 1);
> > > > +	return igt_wait(fbc_is_enabled(), 5000, 1);
> > > >  }
> > > > 
> > > >  static bool psr_wait_until_enabled(void)
> > > > --
> > > > 2.11.0
> > > 
> > > 


More information about the Intel-gfx mailing list