On 21 February 2018 at 19:14, Kenneth Graunke <kenn...@whitecape.org> wrote:
> On Thursday, February 8, 2018 8:47:00 PM PST Emil Velikov wrote:
>> Rejected (9)
>> ============
>> Jason Ekstrand (2):
>>       e52a9f18d69c94b7cb7f81361cdb9e2582c3d742 i965: Replace
>> draw_aux_buffer_disabled with draw_aux_usage
>>       20f70ae3858bc213e052a8434f0e637eb36203c4 i965/draw: Set
>> NEW_AUX_STATE when draw aux changes
>> Reason: Introduce multiple regressions in the piglit compute shader tests.
> Hi Emil,
Hi Ken,

> These are absolutely critical fixes.  These patches fix GPU hangs and
> crashes in Glamor which cause people's X session to die when doing
> exciting things like using their text editor, IDE, or desktop panel.
> It's responsible for a huge swath of our GPU hang bugs on i965.
> Did Jason or I miss an email from you about these being rejected,
> other than at the bottom of a large changelog in an RC announcement?
> Which Piglit tests are regressing?  My guess is that we just need to
> nominate another patch, as they aren't broken in master.
You're right, I should have included more specifics.

The commits cause approx. 1700 regressions in the following:

I've a dozen of attempts trying to find the missing patch(es).
I _really_ want the patches to land, see [1].

As a rule the author of a rejected patch or one with merge conflicts
is explicitly CCed in the RC email.
Additionally, there is also a reply[2] to the patch itself with
request for a)information and/or b) backport.

Yes, we can remind developers more frequently. Yet at some point it
only gets annoying and ultimately - ignored.
Suggestions are more than welcome.

> At this point, we've done 5 point releases in the 17.3.x series, which
> have had DRI3 crashes when pageflipping (in all drivers), and X server
> hangs and crashes galore in i965/Gen9+.  Worse, we fixed those hangs a
> month ago and haven't managed to ship them yet.  We also managed to
> ship a radv that broke completely.
> At this point, 17.3.x is looking like the worst Mesa release in recent
> memory, and I'm about on the verge of advising people to just go back
> to 17.2 until 18.0 comes out.  It's pretty frustrating, and I feel bad
> for our users, who depend on our software for their computer to work.
According to the results from the Jenkins setup, there are no
regressions in 17.3.x wrt the 17.2.x series.
Perhaps we lack test coverage?

Additionally I would not call for 17.2 since I did notice some
glitches with it and Tomb Rider and Dota2.
Latter triggered by a Dota2 update.

> We have to do better, somehow - myself included.  Ideally, we'd find a
> way to avoid major bugs like this in the first place.  Barring that,
> do we need to have developers take a more active role in backporting
> fixes again?  It seems like our nomination process works for simple
> things, but for more complex series, it doesn't work as well.  Maybe
> we need to proactively put together (tested) pull requests for stable?
Hear, hear (aka yes please) for more developer backports.

Should be a good idea to also cross review for the conflicts that
myself or the Igalia team resolve.

Obviously that should not substitute testing _and_ reporting from the
different teams.
Currently the _only_ information that we have is from the Jenkins CI.


[1] https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/mesa-dev/2018-February/185822.html
[2] Must admit the last one, isn't at 100% quite yet.
mesa-dev mailing list

Reply via email to