From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga06.intel.com (mga06b.intel.com [134.134.136.31]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 23B9511A61D for ; Sun, 5 Jun 2022 15:21:53 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sun, 05 Jun 2022 08:19:56 -0700 Message-ID: <871qw3kuhv.wl-ashutosh.dixit@intel.com> From: "Dixit, Ashutosh" To: Abhinav Kumar In-Reply-To: References: <165286178725.21388.6717310292088982350@emeril.freedesktop.org> <934c60df-1293-38d1-408e-ab1bb2c88ec6@quicinc.com> <8735gjluaf.wl-ashutosh.dixit@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Subject: Re: [igt-dev] =?utf-8?b?RndkOiDinJcgRmkuQ0kuSUdUOiBmYWlsdXJlIGZvciBs?= =?utf-8?q?ib/igt=5Fkms=3A_Set_pipe-=3Eplane=5Fprimary_to_driver-assigned_?= =?utf-8?q?primary_plane_when_there_are_multiple_possible_primary_planes_?= =?utf-8?b?KHJldjYp?= List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org, lakshminarayana.vudum@intel.com, Petri Latvala Errors-To: igt-dev-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "igt-dev" List-ID: On Sat, 04 Jun 2022 23:19:51 -0700, Abhinav Kumar wrote: > > Hi Ashutosh > > On 6/4/2022 7:26 PM, Dixit, Ashutosh wrote: > > On Thu, 19 May 2022 13:44:35 -0700, Jessica Zhang wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> On 5/19/2022 1:34 PM, Jessica Zhang wrote: > >>> Hi Lakshmi, > >>> > >>> I looked into this regression, but it doesn't seem to be related to my > >>> patch. Can you help take a look at it? > > > > It seems the failures were related after all and CI correctly caught > > them. They should be properly investigated by both the author an committer > > before merging a patch. This has resulted in multiple people wasting a > > fair amount of their time and multiple bugs being filed as a result :/ > > Please correct if we are missing something. > > That time, CI had reported a different error. Please refer to the following > CI report of the series: > > https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/103897/#rev5 > > That we still think is unrelated to the change. Please comment if you think > otherwise. > > The issues reported by all the following bugs in Jani's email have a very > clear and consistent signature of the SEG fault: > > https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/6133 > https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/6134 > https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/6135 > https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/6136 > https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/6137 > > > Stack trace: > #0 [fatal_sig_handler+0xd6] > #1 [killpg+0x40] > #2 [igt_display_require+0x260] > #3 [__igt_unique____real_main318+0x3c8] > #4 [main+0x34] > #5 [__libc_start_main+0xf3] > #6 [_start+0x2a] > > If this signature was seen in the CI runs earlier of our patch series, this > could have been easily fixed by us as it was not really very hard to fix > once we saw this signature. So i think the CI run on our change always gave > an unrelated error which is different from the other issues seen here. Hi Abhinav, You appear to be correct. I was going by the clear PASS -> FAIL signatures in CI but those failures indeed appear to be unrelated and it is the igt_display_require() segfault above which is the signature for this particular failure. That CI did not flag an obvious failure pre-merge is a problem in itself, but in any case I cannot accuse you of not investigating CI results so sorry about that. Ashutosh