Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] tests/igt: dmesg noise is a kernel failure
On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 08:12:02AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 09:06:31AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > At least when testing the kernel. In normal programs pretty much all > > the dmesg noise would simply be replaced by debug asserts, but in the > > kernel we try rely hard to not fall over minor inconsistencies. > > > > Still for CI purposes there's not really a difference, hence don't > > treat it as such. > > > > Motivated since once again I've seen a statistics where this was split > > up, and then a reduction of "failures" (but in reality just trading > > them in for more "warnings") praised as success. > > > > v2: Clamp to "dmesg-fail" to keep dmesg noise easily identifiable > > (Ville). > > > > Cc: Chris Wilson > > Cc: Ville Syrjälä > > Acked-by: Dylan Baker > > Cc: jari.tahvanai...@intel.com > > Cc: Petri Latvala > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter > > --- > > tests/igt.py | 4 > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/tests/igt.py b/tests/igt.py > > index 7ebb03646b50..21e55e115654 100644 > > --- a/tests/igt.py > > +++ b/tests/igt.py > > @@ -123,6 +123,10 @@ class IGTTest(Test): > > else: > > self.result.result = 'fail' > > > > +# all dmesg noise is considered a test failure when testing the > > kernel > > +if self.result.dmesg > > +self.result.result = 'dmesg-fail' > > This is changing a fail to dmesg-fail. I hate that. I don't know if there's a way to win here. We're trying to reduce 4 states to 3 states for whatever reason, so we're going to lose information :( Doing it this way you'll have to go through every dmesg-fail as well as the fails if you want to see all test failures. Doing it the other way means going through all the fails to find the dmesg warns. -- Ville Syrjälä Intel OTC ___ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] tests/igt: dmesg noise is a kernel failure
Double checking the full picture of the impact: - Current - test result value list for igt (=default piglit): pass, warn, dmesg-warn, fail, dmesg-fail, timeout, crash, incomplete - Intent with proposal below - test result value list for igt (kernel testing): pass, warn, fail, dmesg-fail, timeout, crash, incomplete Right or wrong? Or will fail vanish from this list too like Chris said? Or will there be scenario where one can have fail without dmesg? BR, Jari -Original Message- From: Chris Wilson [mailto:ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk] Sent: Friday, October 7, 2016 10:12 AM To: Daniel Vetter Cc: Intel Graphics Development ; piglit discussion list ; Ville Syrjälä ; Tahvanainen, Jari ; Latvala, Petri ; Vetter, Daniel Subject: Re: [PATCH] tests/igt: dmesg noise is a kernel failure On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 09:06:31AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > At least when testing the kernel. In normal programs pretty much all > the dmesg noise would simply be replaced by debug asserts, but in the > kernel we try rely hard to not fall over minor inconsistencies. > > Still for CI purposes there's not really a difference, hence don't > treat it as such. > > Motivated since once again I've seen a statistics where this was split > up, and then a reduction of "failures" (but in reality just trading > them in for more "warnings") praised as success. > > v2: Clamp to "dmesg-fail" to keep dmesg noise easily identifiable > (Ville). > > Cc: Chris Wilson > Cc: Ville Syrjälä > Acked-by: Dylan Baker > Cc: jari.tahvanai...@intel.com > Cc: Petri Latvala > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter > --- > tests/igt.py | 4 > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/tests/igt.py b/tests/igt.py index > 7ebb03646b50..21e55e115654 100644 > --- a/tests/igt.py > +++ b/tests/igt.py > @@ -123,6 +123,10 @@ class IGTTest(Test): > else: > self.result.result = 'fail' > > +# all dmesg noise is considered a test failure when testing the > kernel > +if self.result.dmesg > +self.result.result = 'dmesg-fail' This is changing a fail to dmesg-fail. I hate that. -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre - Intel Finland Oy Registered Address: PL 281, 00181 Helsinki Business Identity Code: 0357606 - 4 Domiciled in Helsinki This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies. ___ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] tests/igt: dmesg noise is a kernel failure
On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 09:06:31AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > At least when testing the kernel. In normal programs pretty much all > the dmesg noise would simply be replaced by debug asserts, but in the > kernel we try rely hard to not fall over minor inconsistencies. > > Still for CI purposes there's not really a difference, hence don't > treat it as such. > > Motivated since once again I've seen a statistics where this was split > up, and then a reduction of "failures" (but in reality just trading > them in for more "warnings") praised as success. > > v2: Clamp to "dmesg-fail" to keep dmesg noise easily identifiable > (Ville). > > Cc: Chris Wilson > Cc: Ville Syrjälä > Acked-by: Dylan Baker > Cc: jari.tahvanai...@intel.com > Cc: Petri Latvala > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter > --- > tests/igt.py | 4 > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/tests/igt.py b/tests/igt.py > index 7ebb03646b50..21e55e115654 100644 > --- a/tests/igt.py > +++ b/tests/igt.py > @@ -123,6 +123,10 @@ class IGTTest(Test): > else: > self.result.result = 'fail' > > +# all dmesg noise is considered a test failure when testing the > kernel > +if self.result.dmesg > +self.result.result = 'dmesg-fail' This is changing a fail to dmesg-fail. I hate that. -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre ___ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] tests/igt: dmesg noise is a kernel failure
On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 11:16 AM, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Thu, Oct 06, 2016 at 11:07:17AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: >> At least when testing the kernel. In normal programs pretty much all >> the dmesg noise would simply be replaced by debug asserts, but in the >> kernel we try rely hard to not fall over minor inconsistencies. >> >> Still for CI purposes there's not really a difference, hence don't >> treat it as such. >> >> Motivated since once again I've seen a statistics where this was split >> up, and then a reduction of "failures" (but in reality just trading >> them in for more "warnings") praised as success. > > Hear, hear! dfail == fail, and dwarn == warn. > > Calling a failure, a dfail just softens that it failed. Maybe a bit more motiviation why I think all dmesg noise should be tracked as a full-on failure. In userspace there's tons of consistency checks, and those are done using assert(). Debug builds have them, production ones dont, and if you hit it your app dies, and it's counted as a failure under CI. In the kernel it's not great if we just die, so we try very hard to limp along in all these cases instead of dying. But it's still a consistency check firing, and imo should be treated as such. "warn" would then just be for for igt self-checks in the test library/infrastructure itself. The other reasons is CI: "warn" essentially means "something might be wrong, a human needs to check". That's not all that useful for automating stuff, hence why I think we really shouldn't have that status, at least as a usual one. If we go with relabelling, then a consequence is also that we might need to remove some more questionable in-kernel checks. Re Ville's concern: I don't mind whether we call it dmesg-fail or fail in the end. If it helps folks to scan through results I'm fine with changing it to dmesg-fail. But dmesg-warn imo needs to go (for igt). I think dmesg-warn is the right choice for everything else, where some kernel noise might not always mean that there's an issue with your userspace. So again needs a human to check what's going on. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch ___ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] tests/igt: dmesg noise is a kernel failure
On Thu, Oct 06, 2016 at 11:07:17AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > At least when testing the kernel. In normal programs pretty much all > the dmesg noise would simply be replaced by debug asserts, but in the > kernel we try rely hard to not fall over minor inconsistencies. > > Still for CI purposes there's not really a difference, hence don't > treat it as such. > > Motivated since once again I've seen a statistics where this was split > up, and then a reduction of "failures" (but in reality just trading > them in for more "warnings") praised as success. > > Cc: jari.tahvanai...@intel.com > Cc: Petri Latvala > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter > --- > tests/igt.py | 5 + > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/tests/igt.py b/tests/igt.py > index 7ebb03646b50..473027b76936 100644 > --- a/tests/igt.py > +++ b/tests/igt.py > @@ -53,6 +53,7 @@ def check_environment(): > > """ > debugfs_path = "/sys/kernel/debug/dri" > + > if os.getuid() != 0: > raise exceptions.PiglitInternalError( > "Test Environment check: not root!") > @@ -123,6 +124,10 @@ class IGTTest(Test): > else: > self.result.result = 'fail' > > +# all dmesg noise is considered a test failure when testing the > kernel > +if self.result.dmesg > +self.result.result = 'fail' Hmm. So now all errors will look the same? I think I'm usually more interested in the dmesg warns, so this would perhaps make it harder for me to spot them. Not sure I like that. > + > > def list_tests(listname): > """Parse igt test list and return them as a list.""" > -- > 2.9.3 > > ___ > Intel-gfx mailing list > Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx -- Ville Syrjälä Intel OTC ___ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] tests/igt: dmesg noise is a kernel failure
On Thu, Oct 06, 2016 at 11:07:17AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > At least when testing the kernel. In normal programs pretty much all > the dmesg noise would simply be replaced by debug asserts, but in the > kernel we try rely hard to not fall over minor inconsistencies. > > Still for CI purposes there's not really a difference, hence don't > treat it as such. > > Motivated since once again I've seen a statistics where this was split > up, and then a reduction of "failures" (but in reality just trading > them in for more "warnings") praised as success. Hear, hear! dfail == fail, and dwarn == warn. Calling a failure, a dfail just softens that it failed. -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre ___ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx