| Summary: | [i965 regression]igt/kms_rotation_crc/sprite-rotation causes WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 4126 at drivers/gpu/drm/drm_irq.c:1133 drm_wait_one_vblank+0x3b/0x16d [drm]() | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | DRI | Reporter: | lu hua <huax.lu> | ||||
| Component: | DRM/Intel | Assignee: | Carlos Santa <carlos.santa> | ||||
| Status: | CLOSED INVALID | QA Contact: | Intel GFX Bugs mailing list <intel-gfx-bugs> | ||||
| Severity: | normal | ||||||
| Priority: | medium | CC: | adrian.sandu, christophe.prigent, intel-gfx-bugs | ||||
| Version: | unspecified | Keywords: | bisect_pending, regression | ||||
| Hardware: | All | ||||||
| OS: | Linux (All) | ||||||
| Whiteboard: | |||||||
| i915 platform: | I965G | i915 features: | display/Other | ||||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||
|
Description
lu hua
2015-03-18 06:10:53 UTC
Please retest on current drm-intel-nightly. This is no test "sprite-rotation" so I launched all of them. There is no Pass: igt@kms_rotation_crc@bad-pixel-format Fail igt@kms_rotation_crc@bad-tiling Fail igt@kms_rotation_crc@cursor-rotation-180 Fail igt@kms_rotation_crc@primary-rotation-180 Fail igt@kms_rotation_crc@primary-rotation-270 Fail igt@kms_rotation_crc@primary-rotation-90 Fail igt@kms_rotation_crc@sprite-rotation-180 Not run igt@kms_rotation_crc@sprite-rotation-270 Not run igt@kms_rotation_crc@sprite-rotation-90 Fail igt@kms_rotation_crc@sprite-rotation-90-pos-100-0 Fail Hardware: Platform: SKY LAKE Y A0 CPU : Intel(R) Core(TM) m5-6Y57 CPU @ 1.10GHz (family: 6, model: 78 stepping: 3) MCP : SKL-Y D1 2+2 (ou ULX-D1) QDF : QJK9 CPU : SKL D0 Chipset PCH: Sunrise Point LP C1 CRB : SKY LAKE Y LPDDR3 RVP3 CRB FAB2 Reworks : All Mandatories + FBS02,FBS03, F23, O-02 & O-06 Software Linux : Ubuntu 14.04 LTS 64 bits BIOS : SKLSE2R1.R00.X097.B02.1509020030 ME FW : 11.0.0.1173 Ksc (EC FW): 1.19 kernel 4.3.0-rc3-drm-intel-nightly+ (eb69e51) from git://anongit.freedesktop.org/drm-intel Mesa - 11.0.2 from http://cgit.freedesktop.org/mesa/mesa/ xf86-video-intel - 2.99.917 from http://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/driver/xf86-video-intel/ Libdrm - 2.4.64 from http://cgit.freedesktop.org/mesa/drm/ Libva - 1.6.1 from http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libva/ vaapi intel-driver - 1.6.1 from http://cgit.freedesktop.org/vaapi/intel-driver Cairo - 1.14.2 from http://cgit.freedesktop.org/cairo Xorg Xserver - 1.17.2 from http://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/xserver @jani, christophe this bug can't be reproduced because the test no longer exists as it was reported (bug report is from more than a year ago). The commit that changed the test is this one: commit e1ce5eac338f44deda488a44db04faceea12f13a Author: Sonika Jindal <sonika.jindal@intel.com> Date: Wed Apr 22 16:44:05 2015 +0530 kms_rotation_crc: Adding test for 90/270 rotation Adding 90/270 rotation testcase for primary and sprite planes. v2: Added position test for sprite. Checking for gen > 9 for 90/270. Some cleanup and rebase. v3: Added test for unsupported tiling and unsupported pixel format for 90/270 v4: Added the legacy commit to initiate modeset in the negative test(Tvrtko) Signed-off-by: Sonika Jindal <sonika.jindal@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Thomas Wood <thomas.wood@intel.com> However, running the newer tests (sprite-rotation-180, sprite-rotation-270, sprite-rotation-90, sprite-rotation-90-pos-100-0) they all get reported as failures but for a different reason. We need to close this bug as not invalid and then open new bugs for each of the new test cases that are now failing. How should we proceed? Carlos (In reply to Carlos Santa from comment #3) > @jani, christophe > > this bug can't be reproduced because the test no longer exists as it was > reported (bug report is from more than a year ago). > > The commit that changed the test is this one: > > commit e1ce5eac338f44deda488a44db04faceea12f13a > Author: Sonika Jindal <sonika.jindal@intel.com> > Date: Wed Apr 22 16:44:05 2015 +0530 > > kms_rotation_crc: Adding test for 90/270 rotation > > Adding 90/270 rotation testcase for primary and sprite planes. > > v2: Added position test for sprite. Checking for gen > 9 for 90/270. > Some cleanup and rebase. > v3: Added test for unsupported tiling and unsupported pixel format for > 90/270 > v4: Added the legacy commit to initiate modeset in the negative > test(Tvrtko) > > Signed-off-by: Sonika Jindal <sonika.jindal@intel.com> > Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Wood <thomas.wood@intel.com> > > However, running the newer tests (sprite-rotation-180, sprite-rotation-270, > sprite-rotation-90, sprite-rotation-90-pos-100-0) they all get reported as > failures but for a different reason. > > We need to close this bug as not invalid and then open new bugs for each of > the new test cases that are now failing. > > How should we proceed? > > Carlos Sorry, above, I meant to say this should be close as invalid... (In reply to Carlos Santa from comment #4) > (In reply to Carlos Santa from comment #3) > > @jani, christophe > > > > this bug can't be reproduced because the test no longer exists as it was > > reported (bug report is from more than a year ago). > > > > The commit that changed the test is this one: > > > > commit e1ce5eac338f44deda488a44db04faceea12f13a > > Author: Sonika Jindal <sonika.jindal@intel.com> > > Date: Wed Apr 22 16:44:05 2015 +0530 > > > > kms_rotation_crc: Adding test for 90/270 rotation > > > > Adding 90/270 rotation testcase for primary and sprite planes. > > > > v2: Added position test for sprite. Checking for gen > 9 for 90/270. > > Some cleanup and rebase. > > v3: Added test for unsupported tiling and unsupported pixel format for > > 90/270 > > v4: Added the legacy commit to initiate modeset in the negative > > test(Tvrtko) > > > > Signed-off-by: Sonika Jindal <sonika.jindal@intel.com> > > Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com> > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Wood <thomas.wood@intel.com> > > > > However, running the newer tests (sprite-rotation-180, sprite-rotation-270, > > sprite-rotation-90, sprite-rotation-90-pos-100-0) they all get reported as > > failures but for a different reason. > > > > We need to close this bug as not invalid and then open new bugs for each of > > the new test cases that are now failing. > > > > How should we proceed? > > > > Carlos > > Sorry, above, I meant to say this should be close as invalid... Agree, closing as invalid Christophe, please open new bug for current test cases that are failling |
Use of freedesktop.org services, including Bugzilla, is subject to our Code of Conduct. How we collect and use information is described in our Privacy Policy.