[Piglit] [PATCH][RFC] Add dmesg option for reboot policy

[Ilia Mirkin]

On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 8:41 PM, Dylan Baker <baker.dylan.c at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 08:24:22PM -0500, Ilia Mirkin wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 8:07 PM, Dylan Baker <baker.dylan.c at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 02:48:35PM +0200, Martin Peres wrote:
>> >> On 02/11/15 16:57, yann.argotti at linux.intel.com wrote:
>> >> >This adds a policy which advises when user should reboot system to avoid
>> >> >noisy test results due to system becoming unstable, for instance, and
>> >> >therefore continues testing successfully.
>> >> >To do this, a new Dmesg class is proposed which is not filtering dmesg and
>> >> >monitors whether or not one of the following event occurs:
>> >> >- gpu reset failed (not just gpu reset happened, that happens way too
>> >> >often and many tests even provoke hangs intentionally)
>> >> >- gpu crash,
>> >> >- Oops:
>> >> >- BUG
>> >> >- lockdep splat that causes the locking validator to get disabled
>> >> >If one of these issues happen, piglit test execution is stopped
>> >> >-terminating test thread pool- and exit with code 3 to inform that reboot
>> >> >is advised.
>> >> >Then test execution resume, after rebooting system or not, is done like
>> >> >usually with command line parameter "resume".
>> >> >
>> >> >To call it, use command line parameter: --dmesg monitored
>> >>
>> >> Hello Yann,
>> >>
>> >> The rationale behind this patch is very sound and we need something like
>> >> this. Here are however a list of nitpicks:
>> >>
>> >>  - Please send patches with git send-email, otherwise, it makes it
>> >> impossible for us to comment inline which is the usual process for patch
>> >> review. Please re-send :)
>> >>
>> >> - varaiable -> variable; double space after "when a reboot may be required"
>> >>
>> >>  - I am not a big fan of changing the semantic of arguments that have been
>> >> there forever. Can you think of a case where the user would not want the
>> >> test to abort if we reach a state where we cannot trust the result? I am
>> >> including Dylan on this. Also, if we are to keep these modes, can we rename
>> >> the "simple" mode to "warning" and "monitored" to "abort"? This would make
>> >> more sense and clearly state the goal of the modes.
>> >
>> > Ilia, Daniel, Thomas, Glenn, I know that y'all use the dmesg support.
>> > What do you think?
>>
>> Can you provide a summary of what this patch does? It was submitted as
>> an attachment, so I can't (easily) look at it... either way, as long
>> as running with --dmesg doesn't break, I probably don't care. I use
>> --dmesg to know which tests cause the GPU to complain, which I then,
>> in turn, use to pick which tests to debug further. (And since I
>> normally run with -1 anyways, it's ~free to add...)
>>
>>   -ilia
>
> I'm going to interpret that as "I'd be annoyed if piglit just stopped
> when there was dmesg chatter"?

That would definitely be a deal breaker. My wifi goes in and out and
complains loudly about it in dmesg :)

  -ilia