[Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: warning for series starting with [1/3] drm/i915: Check if the stolen memory "reserved" area is enabled or not

[Tomi Sarvela]

On 03/11/17 12:43, Petri Latvala wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 03, 2017 at 10:18:32AM +0200, Tomi Sarvela wrote:
>> On 02/11/17 19:08, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
>>> On Thu, Nov 02, 2017 at 04:34:26PM -0000, Patchwork wrote:
>>>> == Series Details ==
>>>>
>>>> Series: series starting with [1/3] drm/i915: Check if the stolen memory "reserved" area is enabled or not
>>>> URL   : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/33060/
>>>> State : warning
>>>>
>>>> == Summary ==
>>>>
>>>> Test kms_busy:
>>>>           Subgroup extended-modeset-hang-oldfb-with-reset-render-A:
>>>>                   dmesg-warn -> PASS       (shard-hsw)
>>>>           Subgroup extended-modeset-hang-newfb-with-reset-render-B:
>>>>                   pass       -> DMESG-WARN (shard-hsw)
>>>
>>> Hmm. The warn was there already AFAICS. I wonder why this is claiming
>>> things were passing?
>>
>> The sharded result for the run is 'warning'. What do you mean?
> 
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_6930/shards.html
> 
> The comparison is done to CI_DRM_3309 according to this, and
> kms_busy at extended-modeset-hang-newfb-with-reset-render-B was
> dmesg-warn there. Why is the above diff showing pass -> DMESG-WARN?

Found the reason: some of the shards have been run twice for CI_DRM_3309 
(my mistake, probably). This has the unintended effect on visualization 
/ comparison which create independently: results depends on loading 
order if there's flip-flops, and differences might show up.

I'll remove duplicate shards and re-run the html.

Tomi
-- 
Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo