[Mesa-dev] Enabling freedreno CI in Mesa MRs

[Eric Anholt]

Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu at tomeuvizoso.net> writes:

> On Fri, 6 Sep 2019 at 03:23, Rob Clark <robdclark at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 1:42 PM Eric Anholt <eric at anholt.net> wrote:
>> >
>> > If you haven't seen this MR:
>> >
>> > https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/mesa/mesa/merge_requests/1632
>> >
>> > I feel ready to enable CI of freedreno on Mesa MRs.  There are some docs
>> > here:
>> >
>> > https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/mesa/mesa/blob/e81a2d3b40240651f506a2a5afeb989792b3dc0e/.gitlab-ci/README.md
>> >
>> > Once we merge this, this will greatly increase Mesa's pre-merge CI
>> > coverage on MRs by getting us up to GLES3.1 going through the CTS.  Once
>> > krh is ready to put up an in-progress MR of tess, we can override the
>> > GLES3.1 run to force-enable 3.2 with the remaining tess issues as
>> > expected fails, and get a whole lot more API coverage.
>> >
>> > As far as stability of this CI, I've been through I think an order of
>> > magnitude more runs of the CI than are visible from that MR, and I'm
>> > pretty sure we've got a stable set of tests now -- I'm currently working
>> > on fixing the flappy tests so we can drop the a630-specific skip list.
>> > The lab has also been up for long enough that I'm convinced the HW is
>> > stable enough to subject you all to it.
>>
>> I won't claim to be an unbiased observer, but I'm pretty excited about
>> this.  This has been in the works for a while, and I think it is to
>> the point where we aren't going to get much more useful testing of our
>> gitlab runners with it living off on a branch, so at some point you
>> just have to throw the switch.
>>
>> I'd propose, that unless there are any objections, we land this Monday
>> morning (PST) on master, to ensure a relatively short turn-around just
>> in case something went badly.
>>
>> (I can be online(ish) over the weekend if we want to throw the switch
>> sooner.. but I might be AFK here and there to get groceries and things
>> like that.  So response time might be a bit longer than on a week
>> day.)
>>
>> Objections anyone?  Or counter-proposals?
>
> I like the MR a lot and I think it will be a great base for CI for
> panfrost and other gallium SoC drivers.
>
> I'm concerned about the reliability of the current setup though, the
> latest CI run I see in anholt/mesa seemed to fail due to problems in
> the runners?
>
> https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/anholt/mesa/pipelines/61502

Those A306 failures were from the disk filling up, and scripting a fix
for that was one of the TODO items in the MR and is done now.

The A630 failure there is the actual driver bug that that that run
caught.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 832 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/mesa-dev/attachments/20190906/09b34278/attachment-0001.sig>