On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 8:41 PM, Dylan Baker <baker.dyla...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 08:24:22PM -0500, Ilia Mirkin wrote: >> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 8:07 PM, Dylan Baker <baker.dyla...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 02:48:35PM +0200, Martin Peres wrote: >> >> On 02/11/15 16:57, yann.argo...@linux.intel.com wrote: >> >> >This adds a policy which advises when user should reboot system to avoid >> >> >noisy test results due to system becoming unstable, for instance, and >> >> >therefore continues testing successfully. >> >> >To do this, a new Dmesg class is proposed which is not filtering dmesg >> >> >and >> >> >monitors whether or not one of the following event occurs: >> >> >- gpu reset failed (not just gpu reset happened, that happens way too >> >> >often and many tests even provoke hangs intentionally) >> >> >- gpu crash, >> >> >- Oops: >> >> >- BUG >> >> >- lockdep splat that causes the locking validator to get disabled >> >> >If one of these issues happen, piglit test execution is stopped >> >> >-terminating test thread pool- and exit with code 3 to inform that reboot >> >> >is advised. >> >> >Then test execution resume, after rebooting system or not, is done like >> >> >usually with command line parameter "resume". >> >> > >> >> >To call it, use command line parameter: --dmesg monitored >> >> >> >> Hello Yann, >> >> >> >> The rationale behind this patch is very sound and we need something like >> >> this. Here are however a list of nitpicks: >> >> >> >> - Please send patches with git send-email, otherwise, it makes it >> >> impossible for us to comment inline which is the usual process for patch >> >> review. Please re-send :) >> >> >> >> - varaiable -> variable; double space after "when a reboot may be >> >> required" >> >> >> >> - I am not a big fan of changing the semantic of arguments that have been >> >> there forever. Can you think of a case where the user would not want the >> >> test to abort if we reach a state where we cannot trust the result? I am >> >> including Dylan on this. Also, if we are to keep these modes, can we >> >> rename >> >> the "simple" mode to "warning" and "monitored" to "abort"? This would make >> >> more sense and clearly state the goal of the modes. >> > >> > Ilia, Daniel, Thomas, Glenn, I know that y'all use the dmesg support. >> > What do you think? >> >> Can you provide a summary of what this patch does? It was submitted as >> an attachment, so I can't (easily) look at it... either way, as long >> as running with --dmesg doesn't break, I probably don't care. I use >> --dmesg to know which tests cause the GPU to complain, which I then, >> in turn, use to pick which tests to debug further. (And since I >> normally run with -1 anyways, it's ~free to add...) >> >> -ilia > > I'm going to interpret that as "I'd be annoyed if piglit just stopped > when there was dmesg chatter"?
That would definitely be a deal breaker. My wifi goes in and out and complains loudly about it in dmesg :) -ilia _______________________________________________ Piglit mailing list Piglit@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/piglit