[PATCH i-g-t] tests/gem_set_tiling_vs_pwrite: Skip on unknown swizzling

[PATCH i-g-t] tests/gem_set_tiling_vs_pwrite: Skip on unknown swizzling

[Tvrtko Ursulin]

From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>

Same as in commit 78071c2fa53d ("igt/gem_tiled_partial_pwrite_pread: Check
for known swizzling"), to be able to compare the bo against the test
pattern we need to skip the test if the swizzling is not compatible.

Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102575
Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
---
Eeek confidence level low - is this correct?
---
 tests/gem_set_tiling_vs_pwrite.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+)

diff --git a/tests/gem_set_tiling_vs_pwrite.c b/tests/gem_set_tiling_vs_pwrite.c
index f0126b6484b7..3be908dbd103 100644
--- a/tests/gem_set_tiling_vs_pwrite.c
+++ b/tests/gem_set_tiling_vs_pwrite.c
@@ -42,6 +42,18 @@ IGT_TEST_DESCRIPTION("Check set_tiling vs pwrite coherency.");
 #define OBJECT_SIZE (1024*1024)
 #define TEST_STRIDE (1024*4)
 
+static bool known_swizzling(int fd, uint32_t handle)
+{
+	struct drm_i915_gem_get_tiling arg = {
+		.handle = handle,
+	};
+
+	if (igt_ioctl(fd, DRM_IOCTL_I915_GEM_GET_TILING, &arg))
+		return false;
+
+	return arg.phys_swizzle_mode == arg.swizzle_mode;
+}
+
 /**
  * Testcase: Check set_tiling vs pwrite coherency
  */
@@ -66,6 +78,12 @@ igt_simple_main
 
 	gem_set_tiling(fd, handle, I915_TILING_X, TEST_STRIDE);
 
+	/*
+	 * As we want to compare our template pattern against
+	 * the target bo, we need consistent swizzling on both.
+	 */
+	igt_require(known_swizzling(fd, handle));
+
 	/* touch it */
 	gem_set_domain(fd, handle, I915_GEM_DOMAIN_GTT, I915_GEM_DOMAIN_GTT);
 	*ptr = 0xdeadbeef;
-- 
2.17.1

_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

[igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t] tests/gem_set_tiling_vs_pwrite: Skip on unknown swizzling

[Tvrtko Ursulin]

From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>

Same as in commit 78071c2fa53d ("igt/gem_tiled_partial_pwrite_pread: Check
for known swizzling"), to be able to compare the bo against the test
pattern we need to skip the test if the swizzling is not compatible.

Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102575
Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
---
Eeek confidence level low - is this correct?
---
 tests/gem_set_tiling_vs_pwrite.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+)

diff --git a/tests/gem_set_tiling_vs_pwrite.c b/tests/gem_set_tiling_vs_pwrite.c
index f0126b6484b7..3be908dbd103 100644
--- a/tests/gem_set_tiling_vs_pwrite.c
+++ b/tests/gem_set_tiling_vs_pwrite.c
@@ -42,6 +42,18 @@ IGT_TEST_DESCRIPTION("Check set_tiling vs pwrite coherency.");
 #define OBJECT_SIZE (1024*1024)
 #define TEST_STRIDE (1024*4)
 
+static bool known_swizzling(int fd, uint32_t handle)
+{
+	struct drm_i915_gem_get_tiling arg = {
+		.handle = handle,
+	};
+
+	if (igt_ioctl(fd, DRM_IOCTL_I915_GEM_GET_TILING, &arg))
+		return false;
+
+	return arg.phys_swizzle_mode == arg.swizzle_mode;
+}
+
 /**
  * Testcase: Check set_tiling vs pwrite coherency
  */
@@ -66,6 +78,12 @@ igt_simple_main
 
 	gem_set_tiling(fd, handle, I915_TILING_X, TEST_STRIDE);
 
+	/*
+	 * As we want to compare our template pattern against
+	 * the target bo, we need consistent swizzling on both.
+	 */
+	igt_require(known_swizzling(fd, handle));
+
 	/* touch it */
 	gem_set_domain(fd, handle, I915_GEM_DOMAIN_GTT, I915_GEM_DOMAIN_GTT);
 	*ptr = 0xdeadbeef;
-- 
2.17.1

_______________________________________________
igt-dev mailing list
igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/igt-dev

Re: [PATCH i-g-t] tests/gem_set_tiling_vs_pwrite: Skip on unknown swizzling

[Chris Wilson]

Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-10-11 13:30:27)
> From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
> 
> Same as in commit 78071c2fa53d ("igt/gem_tiled_partial_pwrite_pread: Check
> for known swizzling"), to be able to compare the bo against the test
> pattern we need to skip the test if the swizzling is not compatible.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
> Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102575
> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> ---
> Eeek confidence level low - is this correct?

Actually this is a slightly more subtle problem,
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/240327/
-Chris
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Re: [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t] tests/gem_set_tiling_vs_pwrite: Skip on unknown swizzling

[Chris Wilson]

Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-10-11 13:30:27)
> From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
> 
> Same as in commit 78071c2fa53d ("igt/gem_tiled_partial_pwrite_pread: Check
> for known swizzling"), to be able to compare the bo against the test
> pattern we need to skip the test if the swizzling is not compatible.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
> Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102575
> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> ---
> Eeek confidence level low - is this correct?

Actually this is a slightly more subtle problem,
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/240327/
-Chris
_______________________________________________
igt-dev mailing list
igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/igt-dev

Re: [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t] tests/gem_set_tiling_vs_pwrite: Skip on unknown swizzling

[Tvrtko Ursulin]

On 11/10/2018 13:34, Chris Wilson wrote:
> Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-10-11 13:30:27)
>> From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
>>
>> Same as in commit 78071c2fa53d ("igt/gem_tiled_partial_pwrite_pread: Check
>> for known swizzling"), to be able to compare the bo against the test
>> pattern we need to skip the test if the swizzling is not compatible.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
>> Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102575
>> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
>> ---
>> Eeek confidence level low - is this correct?
> 
> Actually this is a slightly more subtle problem,
> https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/240327/

So assuming your patch is in, this IGT cannot actually work if any 
swizzling is in effect? Or without your patch, it should skip based on 
known_swizzling? Or is even that not enough?

Regards,

Tvrtko
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Re: [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t] tests/gem_set_tiling_vs_pwrite: Skip on unknown swizzling

[Tvrtko Ursulin]

On 11/10/2018 13:34, Chris Wilson wrote:
> Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-10-11 13:30:27)
>> From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
>>
>> Same as in commit 78071c2fa53d ("igt/gem_tiled_partial_pwrite_pread: Check
>> for known swizzling"), to be able to compare the bo against the test
>> pattern we need to skip the test if the swizzling is not compatible.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
>> Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102575
>> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
>> ---
>> Eeek confidence level low - is this correct?
> 
> Actually this is a slightly more subtle problem,
> https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/240327/

So assuming your patch is in, this IGT cannot actually work if any 
swizzling is in effect? Or without your patch, it should skip based on 
known_swizzling? Or is even that not enough?

Regards,

Tvrtko
_______________________________________________
igt-dev mailing list
igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/igt-dev

Re: [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t] tests/gem_set_tiling_vs_pwrite: Skip on unknown swizzling

[Chris Wilson]

Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-10-11 13:42:31)
> 
> On 11/10/2018 13:34, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-10-11 13:30:27)
> >> From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
> >>
> >> Same as in commit 78071c2fa53d ("igt/gem_tiled_partial_pwrite_pread: Check
> >> for known swizzling"), to be able to compare the bo against the test
> >> pattern we need to skip the test if the swizzling is not compatible.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
> >> Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102575
> >> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> >> ---
> >> Eeek confidence level low - is this correct?
> > 
> > Actually this is a slightly more subtle problem,
> > https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/240327/
> 
> So assuming your patch is in, this IGT cannot actually work if any 
> swizzling is in effect?

With the kernel patch, pwrite is a pure linear write to physical
address, not guaranteeing layout on the gpu (the gpu sees it through the
tile + swizzle combo). So set-tiling no longer affects pwrite and the
test should see identical in/out.

> Or without your patch, it should skip based on 
> known_swizzling? Or is even that not enough?

Without the patch, we would need to take swizzling into account and so
skip as we cannot know the swizzling in this case. The test illustrates
that currently we do the swizzling asymmetrically, our API is bust. The
test further illustrates that at times we cannot even know when swizzling
is required (due to L-shape eccentricities and the swizzling changing
within an object) and so the concept of handling swizzling on the API
boundary on behalf of the user is unworkable.
-Chris
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Re: [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t] tests/gem_set_tiling_vs_pwrite: Skip on unknown swizzling

[Chris Wilson]

Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-10-11 13:42:31)
> 
> On 11/10/2018 13:34, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-10-11 13:30:27)
> >> From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
> >>
> >> Same as in commit 78071c2fa53d ("igt/gem_tiled_partial_pwrite_pread: Check
> >> for known swizzling"), to be able to compare the bo against the test
> >> pattern we need to skip the test if the swizzling is not compatible.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
> >> Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102575
> >> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> >> ---
> >> Eeek confidence level low - is this correct?
> > 
> > Actually this is a slightly more subtle problem,
> > https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/240327/
> 
> So assuming your patch is in, this IGT cannot actually work if any 
> swizzling is in effect?

With the kernel patch, pwrite is a pure linear write to physical
address, not guaranteeing layout on the gpu (the gpu sees it through the
tile + swizzle combo). So set-tiling no longer affects pwrite and the
test should see identical in/out.

> Or without your patch, it should skip based on 
> known_swizzling? Or is even that not enough?

Without the patch, we would need to take swizzling into account and so
skip as we cannot know the swizzling in this case. The test illustrates
that currently we do the swizzling asymmetrically, our API is bust. The
test further illustrates that at times we cannot even know when swizzling
is required (due to L-shape eccentricities and the swizzling changing
within an object) and so the concept of handling swizzling on the API
boundary on behalf of the user is unworkable.
-Chris
_______________________________________________
igt-dev mailing list
igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/igt-dev

Re: [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t] tests/gem_set_tiling_vs_pwrite: Skip on unknown swizzling

[Tvrtko Ursulin]

On 11/10/2018 13:49, Chris Wilson wrote:
> Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-10-11 13:42:31)
>>
>> On 11/10/2018 13:34, Chris Wilson wrote:
>>> Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-10-11 13:30:27)
>>>> From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
>>>>
>>>> Same as in commit 78071c2fa53d ("igt/gem_tiled_partial_pwrite_pread: Check
>>>> for known swizzling"), to be able to compare the bo against the test
>>>> pattern we need to skip the test if the swizzling is not compatible.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
>>>> Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102575
>>>> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
>>>> ---
>>>> Eeek confidence level low - is this correct?
>>>
>>> Actually this is a slightly more subtle problem,
>>> https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/240327/
>>
>> So assuming your patch is in, this IGT cannot actually work if any
>> swizzling is in effect?
> 
> With the kernel patch, pwrite is a pure linear write to physical
> address, not guaranteeing layout on the gpu (the gpu sees it through the
> tile + swizzle combo). So set-tiling no longer affects pwrite and the
> test should see identical in/out.

Yes of course..

>> Or without your patch, it should skip based on
>> known_swizzling? Or is even that not enough?
> 
> Without the patch, we would need to take swizzling into account and so
> skip as we cannot know the swizzling in this case. The test illustrates
> that currently we do the swizzling asymmetrically, our API is bust. The
> test further illustrates that at times we cannot even know when swizzling
> is required (due to L-shape eccentricities and the swizzling changing
> within an object) and so the concept of handling swizzling on the API
> boundary on behalf of the user is unworkable.

Sounds believable to me. So I am happy to review that patch on the 
technical level, just ask you to gather some more acks. Sounds like a plan?

Is there any risk that there were no bug reports due the affected 
platform being old?

Regards,

Tvrtko
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Re: [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t] tests/gem_set_tiling_vs_pwrite: Skip on unknown swizzling

[Tvrtko Ursulin]

On 11/10/2018 13:49, Chris Wilson wrote:
> Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-10-11 13:42:31)
>>
>> On 11/10/2018 13:34, Chris Wilson wrote:
>>> Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-10-11 13:30:27)
>>>> From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
>>>>
>>>> Same as in commit 78071c2fa53d ("igt/gem_tiled_partial_pwrite_pread: Check
>>>> for known swizzling"), to be able to compare the bo against the test
>>>> pattern we need to skip the test if the swizzling is not compatible.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
>>>> Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102575
>>>> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
>>>> ---
>>>> Eeek confidence level low - is this correct?
>>>
>>> Actually this is a slightly more subtle problem,
>>> https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/240327/
>>
>> So assuming your patch is in, this IGT cannot actually work if any
>> swizzling is in effect?
> 
> With the kernel patch, pwrite is a pure linear write to physical
> address, not guaranteeing layout on the gpu (the gpu sees it through the
> tile + swizzle combo). So set-tiling no longer affects pwrite and the
> test should see identical in/out.

Yes of course..

>> Or without your patch, it should skip based on
>> known_swizzling? Or is even that not enough?
> 
> Without the patch, we would need to take swizzling into account and so
> skip as we cannot know the swizzling in this case. The test illustrates
> that currently we do the swizzling asymmetrically, our API is bust. The
> test further illustrates that at times we cannot even know when swizzling
> is required (due to L-shape eccentricities and the swizzling changing
> within an object) and so the concept of handling swizzling on the API
> boundary on behalf of the user is unworkable.

Sounds believable to me. So I am happy to review that patch on the 
technical level, just ask you to gather some more acks. Sounds like a plan?

Is there any risk that there were no bug reports due the affected 
platform being old?

Regards,

Tvrtko
_______________________________________________
igt-dev mailing list
igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/igt-dev

[igt-dev] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for tests/gem_set_tiling_vs_pwrite: Skip on unknown swizzling

[Patchwork]

== Series Details ==

Series: tests/gem_set_tiling_vs_pwrite: Skip on unknown swizzling
URL   : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/50865/
State : success

== Summary ==

= CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_4958 -> IGTPW_1939 =

== Summary - SUCCESS ==

  No regressions found.

  External URL: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/api/1.0/series/50865/revisions/1/mbox/

== Known issues ==

  Here are the changes found in IGTPW_1939 that come from known issues:

  === IGT changes ===

    ==== Issues hit ====

    igt@drv_selftest@live_evict:
      fi-bsw-kefka:       PASS -> DMESG-WARN (fdo#107709)

    igt@kms_pipe_crc_basic@hang-read-crc-pipe-a:
      fi-byt-clapper:     PASS -> FAIL (fdo#107362, fdo#103191)

    
    ==== Possible fixes ====

    igt@kms_frontbuffer_tracking@basic:
      fi-byt-clapper:     FAIL (fdo#103167) -> PASS

    igt@pm_rpm@basic-pci-d3-state:
      fi-skl-6600u:       FAIL (fdo#107707) -> PASS

    igt@prime_vgem@basic-fence-flip:
      fi-ilk-650:         FAIL (fdo#104008) -> PASS

    
  fdo#103167 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103167
  fdo#103191 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103191
  fdo#104008 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104008
  fdo#107362 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=107362
  fdo#107707 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=107707
  fdo#107709 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=107709


== Participating hosts (48 -> 41) ==

  Missing    (7): fi-ilk-m540 fi-hsw-4200u fi-byt-squawks fi-bsw-cyan fi-snb-2520m fi-ctg-p8600 fi-byt-n2820 


== Build changes ==

    * IGT: IGT_4672 -> IGTPW_1939

  CI_DRM_4958: 9990e1665029dc2ef4a9c0632b8a2f516263e595 @ git://anongit.freedesktop.org/gfx-ci/linux
  IGTPW_1939: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/IGTPW_1939/
  IGT_4672: 4497591d2572831a9f07fd9e48a2571bfcffe354 @ git://anongit.freedesktop.org/xorg/app/intel-gpu-tools

== Logs ==

For more details see: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/IGTPW_1939/issues.html
_______________________________________________
igt-dev mailing list
igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/igt-dev

[igt-dev] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for tests/gem_set_tiling_vs_pwrite: Skip on unknown swizzling

[Patchwork]

== Series Details ==

Series: tests/gem_set_tiling_vs_pwrite: Skip on unknown swizzling
URL   : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/50865/
State : failure

== Summary ==

= CI Bug Log - changes from IGT_4672_full -> IGTPW_1939_full =

== Summary - FAILURE ==

  Serious unknown changes coming with IGTPW_1939_full absolutely need to be
  verified manually.
  
  If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
  introduced in IGTPW_1939_full, please notify your bug team to allow them
  to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI.

  External URL: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/api/1.0/series/50865/revisions/1/mbox/

== Possible new issues ==

  Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in IGTPW_1939_full:

  === IGT changes ===

    ==== Possible regressions ====

    igt@kms_concurrent@pipe-a:
      shard-kbl:          PASS -> DMESG-WARN

    
    ==== Warnings ====

    igt@pm_rc6_residency@rc6-accuracy:
      shard-snb:          PASS -> SKIP

    
== Known issues ==

  Here are the changes found in IGTPW_1939_full that come from known issues:

  === IGT changes ===

    ==== Issues hit ====

    igt@gem_busy@close-race:
      shard-snb:          PASS -> INCOMPLETE (fdo#105411)

    igt@kms_cursor_crc@cursor-128x128-random:
      shard-apl:          PASS -> FAIL (fdo#103232) +4
      shard-kbl:          PASS -> FAIL (fdo#103232)

    igt@kms_cursor_crc@cursor-128x42-sliding:
      shard-glk:          PASS -> FAIL (fdo#103232) +2

    igt@kms_cursor_crc@cursor-256x256-suspend:
      shard-kbl:          PASS -> FAIL (fdo#103191, fdo#103232)
      shard-apl:          PASS -> FAIL (fdo#103191, fdo#103232)

    igt@kms_flip@2x-flip-vs-expired-vblank:
      shard-glk:          PASS -> FAIL (fdo#105363)

    igt@kms_flip@modeset-vs-vblank-race-interruptible:
      shard-kbl:          PASS -> FAIL (fdo#103060)

    igt@kms_frontbuffer_tracking@fbc-1p-primscrn-spr-indfb-draw-mmap-gtt:
      shard-apl:          PASS -> FAIL (fdo#103167) +1

    igt@kms_frontbuffer_tracking@fbc-1p-primscrn-spr-indfb-fullscreen:
      shard-glk:          PASS -> FAIL (fdo#103167) +1
      shard-kbl:          PASS -> FAIL (fdo#103167)

    igt@kms_frontbuffer_tracking@fbc-1p-rte:
      shard-glk:          PASS -> FAIL (fdo#103167, fdo#105682)
      shard-kbl:          PASS -> FAIL (fdo#103167, fdo#105682)
      shard-apl:          PASS -> FAIL (fdo#103167, fdo#105682)

    igt@kms_plane_alpha_blend@pipe-a-constant-alpha-max:
      shard-glk:          PASS -> FAIL (fdo#108145)
      shard-kbl:          PASS -> FAIL (fdo#108145) +1
      shard-apl:          PASS -> FAIL (fdo#108145)

    igt@kms_plane_multiple@atomic-pipe-b-tiling-y:
      shard-glk:          PASS -> FAIL (fdo#103166) +1
      shard-apl:          PASS -> FAIL (fdo#103166)

    
    ==== Possible fixes ====

    igt@kms_cursor_crc@cursor-128x42-onscreen:
      shard-apl:          FAIL (fdo#103232) -> PASS +2

    igt@kms_cursor_crc@cursor-256x256-sliding:
      shard-glk:          FAIL (fdo#103232) -> PASS +3

    igt@kms_cursor_crc@cursor-64x64-sliding:
      shard-kbl:          FAIL (fdo#103232) -> PASS

    igt@kms_cursor_crc@cursor-64x64-suspend:
      shard-glk:          INCOMPLETE (k.org#198133, fdo#103359) -> PASS
      shard-apl:          FAIL (fdo#103191, fdo#103232) -> PASS

    igt@kms_cursor_legacy@2x-long-cursor-vs-flip-atomic:
      shard-hsw:          FAIL (fdo#105767) -> PASS

    igt@kms_frontbuffer_tracking@fbc-1p-primscrn-spr-indfb-draw-mmap-gtt:
      shard-snb:          INCOMPLETE (fdo#105411) -> PASS

    igt@kms_frontbuffer_tracking@fbc-1p-primscrn-spr-indfb-draw-mmap-wc:
      shard-apl:          FAIL (fdo#103167) -> PASS

    igt@kms_frontbuffer_tracking@fbc-2p-primscrn-spr-indfb-draw-mmap-wc:
      shard-glk:          FAIL (fdo#103167) -> PASS +1

    igt@kms_plane@plane-position-covered-pipe-a-planes:
      shard-glk:          FAIL (fdo#103166) -> PASS +3

    igt@kms_plane_multiple@atomic-pipe-b-tiling-x:
      shard-apl:          FAIL (fdo#103166) -> PASS +2

    igt@kms_setmode@basic:
      shard-apl:          FAIL (fdo#99912) -> PASS
      shard-kbl:          FAIL (fdo#99912) -> PASS

    
  fdo#103060 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103060
  fdo#103166 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103166
  fdo#103167 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103167
  fdo#103191 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103191
  fdo#103232 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103232
  fdo#103359 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103359
  fdo#105363 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105363
  fdo#105411 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105411
  fdo#105682 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105682
  fdo#105767 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105767
  fdo#108145 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=108145
  fdo#99912 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=99912
  k.org#198133 https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=198133


== Participating hosts (6 -> 5) ==

  Missing    (1): shard-skl 


== Build changes ==

    * IGT: IGT_4672 -> IGTPW_1939
    * Linux: CI_DRM_4952 -> CI_DRM_4958

  CI_DRM_4952: a62e43ba13605a478b22307ea1790d48aea029a6 @ git://anongit.freedesktop.org/gfx-ci/linux
  CI_DRM_4958: 9990e1665029dc2ef4a9c0632b8a2f516263e595 @ git://anongit.freedesktop.org/gfx-ci/linux
  IGTPW_1939: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/IGTPW_1939/
  IGT_4672: 4497591d2572831a9f07fd9e48a2571bfcffe354 @ git://anongit.freedesktop.org/xorg/app/intel-gpu-tools

== Logs ==

For more details see: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/IGTPW_1939/shards.html
_______________________________________________
igt-dev mailing list
igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/igt-dev