Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/dsi: 4th attempt to get rid of IOSF GPIO (rev2)
http://gfx-ci.igk.intel.com/cibuglog-ng/results/compare?from=CI_DRM_13901_full&to=Patchwork_126526v6_full&csrfmiddlewaretoken=LxQnwBlJ7BUCUML28uJEQTM1MHWEEflsGVkPmXKZuSrld9uiq4pf31pBdCHSixXD&query= Comparison for your series - premerge testing completed before base build testing and report was not published automatically on PW Regards, Ewelina -Original Message- From: Andy Shevchenko Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2023 6:30 PM To: Jani Nikula Cc: Saarinen, Jani ; Musial, Ewelina ; Illipilli, TejasreeX ; LGCI Bug Filing ; intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Hans de Goede Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/dsi: 4th attempt to get rid of IOSF GPIO (rev2) On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 07:17:48PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote: > On Wed, 22 Nov 2023, "Saarinen, Jani" wrote: > >> From: Musial, Ewelina > >> Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2023 4:25 PM ... > >> But this list had only series which were in queue here > >> https://intel-gfx- ci.01.org/queue/index.html and today I was > >> checking exactly how queue for shards is created and there are jobs which > >> are not displayed there. > >> Directly in Jenkins we do have multiple more jobs than in this > >> queue only and I also killed them. I was discussing exactly this > >> case today with Michał and he pointed out that in explanation below > >> queues we do have > >> highlighted: Due to technical limitation this is just an > >> approximation of the queue. It is good for assessing the length of > >> the queue, but should not be considered as completely accurate. > > OK. So could have been in the list but not sure. > > Okay, timeout. > > I just pushed the series. I trust Hans' testing here, considering the > likely platform impact of the series and CI coverage of said platforms. > > Thanks for the patches and review. Thank you, Jani, Hans, Ville and others! -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/dsi: 4th attempt to get rid of IOSF GPIO (rev2)
On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 12:55:05PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote: > On Tue, 21 Nov 2023, "Illipilli, TejasreeX" > wrote: > > Hi , > > > > https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/125977/ > > Thanks, I guess, but now what? There are no shards results but the > series is not in the shards queue either [1]. > > I don't know what to do. Tell me if anything I can help with. To me sounds like CI doesn't like the series because of those checkpatch warnings... But I'm not familiar at all with that, I might be very well mistaken. > [1] https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/queue/index.html#fullshards-queue > > -Original Message- > > From: Jani Nikula > > Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2023 10:29 PM > > To: LGCI Bug Filing ; Andy Shevchenko > > > > Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > > Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/dsi: 4th attempt > > to get rid of IOSF GPIO (rev2) > > > > On Thu, 16 Nov 2023, Patchwork wrote: > >> == Series Details == > >> > >> Series: drm/i915/dsi: 4th attempt to get rid of IOSF GPIO (rev2) > >> URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/125977/ > >> State : failure > >> > >> == Summary == > >> > >> CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_13883 -> Patchwork_125977v2 > >> > >> > >> Summary > >> --- > >> > >> **FAILURE** > >> > >> Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_125977v2 absolutely need > >> to be > >> verified manually. > >> > >> If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes > >> introduced in Patchwork_125977v2, please notify your bug team > >> (lgci.bug.fil...@intel.com) to allow them > >> to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in > >> CI. > > > > The reported issue is unrelated to the series. > > > > Please consider adding > > > > Reply-To: lgci.bug.fil...@intel.com > > > > message header to these status mails, so the right mail gets added > > automatically. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/dsi: 4th attempt to get rid of IOSF GPIO (rev2)
On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 07:17:48PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote: > On Wed, 22 Nov 2023, "Saarinen, Jani" wrote: > >> From: Musial, Ewelina > >> Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2023 4:25 PM ... > >> But this list had only series which were in queue here https://intel-gfx- > >> ci.01.org/queue/index.html and today I was checking exactly how queue for > >> shards is created and there are jobs which are not displayed there. > >> Directly in Jenkins we do have multiple more jobs than in this queue only > >> and I also killed them. I was discussing exactly this case today with > >> Michał and he pointed out that in explanation below queues we do have > >> highlighted: Due to technical limitation this is just an approximation of > >> the queue. It is good for assessing the length of the queue, but should > >> not be considered as completely accurate. > > OK. So could have been in the list but not sure. > > Okay, timeout. > > I just pushed the series. I trust Hans' testing here, considering the > likely platform impact of the series and CI coverage of said platforms. > > Thanks for the patches and review. Thank you, Jani, Hans, Ville and others! -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/dsi: 4th attempt to get rid of IOSF GPIO (rev2)
On Wed, 22 Nov 2023, "Saarinen, Jani" wrote: > Hi, >> -Original Message- >> From: Musial, Ewelina >> Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2023 4:25 PM >> To: Saarinen, Jani ; Jani Nikula >> ; Illipilli, TejasreeX >> ; >> LGCI Bug Filing ; Andy Shevchenko >> >> Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org >> Subject: RE: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/dsi: 4th attempt >> to get rid >> of IOSF GPIO (rev2) >> >> But this list had only series which were in queue here https://intel-gfx- >> ci.01.org/queue/index.html and today I was checking exactly how queue for >> shards is created and there are jobs which are not displayed there. Directly >> in >> Jenkins we do have multiple more jobs than in this queue only and I also >> killed >> them. I was discussing exactly this case today with Michał and he pointed >> out that >> in explanation below queues we do have highlighted: >> Due to technical limitation this is just an approximation of the queue. It >> is good >> for assessing the length of the queue, but should not be considered as >> completely accurate. > OK. So could have been in the list but not sure. Okay, timeout. I just pushed the series. I trust Hans' testing here, considering the likely platform impact of the series and CI coverage of said platforms. Thanks for the patches and review. BR, Jani. >> >> Regards, >> Ewelina >> >> -Original Message- >> From: Saarinen, Jani >> Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2023 3:04 PM >> To: Musial, Ewelina ; Jani Nikula >> ; Illipilli, TejasreeX >> ; >> LGCI Bug Filing ; Andy Shevchenko >> >> Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org >> Subject: RE: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/dsi: 4th attempt >> to get rid >> of IOSF GPIO (rev2) >> >> HI, >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: Intel-gfx On Behalf Of >> > Musial, Ewelina >> > Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2023 3:39 PM >> > To: Jani Nikula ; Illipilli, TejasreeX >> > ; LGCI Bug Filing >> > ; Andy Shevchenko >> > >> > Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org >> > Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/dsi: 4th >> > attempt to get rid of IOSF GPIO (rev2) >> > >> > Hi, I reviewed what I could, and my conclusion is that CI.FULL for >> > this series was killed due to my work around 126526v6 - yesterday I >> > was asked to do whatever I can to speed up shards testing for >> > mentioned series and I killed multiple sessions which were higher in >> > queue. We do not have option to simply bump priority for premerge >> > series and the only way (not recommended but sometimes needed) is to >> > drop everything what is higher. I've added this series back to queue. >> > Sorry for inconvenience >> Nope. It was not part of that list. We checked that with Jani too. See those >> pictures we discussed. >> > >> > Regards, >> > Ewelina >> >> Br, >> Jani S -- Jani Nikula, Intel
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/dsi: 4th attempt to get rid of IOSF GPIO (rev2)
Hi, > -Original Message- > From: Musial, Ewelina > Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2023 4:25 PM > To: Saarinen, Jani ; Jani Nikula > ; Illipilli, TejasreeX > ; > LGCI Bug Filing ; Andy Shevchenko > > Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > Subject: RE: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/dsi: 4th attempt > to get rid > of IOSF GPIO (rev2) > > But this list had only series which were in queue here https://intel-gfx- > ci.01.org/queue/index.html and today I was checking exactly how queue for > shards is created and there are jobs which are not displayed there. Directly > in > Jenkins we do have multiple more jobs than in this queue only and I also > killed > them. I was discussing exactly this case today with Michał and he pointed out > that > in explanation below queues we do have highlighted: > Due to technical limitation this is just an approximation of the queue. It is > good > for assessing the length of the queue, but should not be considered as > completely accurate. OK. So could have been in the list but not sure. > > Regards, > Ewelina > > -Original Message- > From: Saarinen, Jani > Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2023 3:04 PM > To: Musial, Ewelina ; Jani Nikula > ; Illipilli, TejasreeX > ; > LGCI Bug Filing ; Andy Shevchenko > > Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > Subject: RE: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/dsi: 4th attempt > to get rid > of IOSF GPIO (rev2) > > HI, > > -Original Message- > > From: Intel-gfx On Behalf Of > > Musial, Ewelina > > Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2023 3:39 PM > > To: Jani Nikula ; Illipilli, TejasreeX > > ; LGCI Bug Filing > > ; Andy Shevchenko > > > > Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > > Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/dsi: 4th > > attempt to get rid of IOSF GPIO (rev2) > > > > Hi, I reviewed what I could, and my conclusion is that CI.FULL for > > this series was killed due to my work around 126526v6 - yesterday I > > was asked to do whatever I can to speed up shards testing for > > mentioned series and I killed multiple sessions which were higher in > > queue. We do not have option to simply bump priority for premerge > > series and the only way (not recommended but sometimes needed) is to > > drop everything what is higher. I've added this series back to queue. > > Sorry for inconvenience > Nope. It was not part of that list. We checked that with Jani too. See those > pictures we discussed. > > > > Regards, > > Ewelina > > Br, > Jani S
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/dsi: 4th attempt to get rid of IOSF GPIO (rev2)
But this list had only series which were in queue here https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/queue/index.html and today I was checking exactly how queue for shards is created and there are jobs which are not displayed there. Directly in Jenkins we do have multiple more jobs than in this queue only and I also killed them. I was discussing exactly this case today with Michał and he pointed out that in explanation below queues we do have highlighted: Due to technical limitation this is just an approximation of the queue. It is good for assessing the length of the queue, but should not be considered as completely accurate. Regards, Ewelina -Original Message- From: Saarinen, Jani Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2023 3:04 PM To: Musial, Ewelina ; Jani Nikula ; Illipilli, TejasreeX ; LGCI Bug Filing ; Andy Shevchenko Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org Subject: RE: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/dsi: 4th attempt to get rid of IOSF GPIO (rev2) HI, > -Original Message- > From: Intel-gfx On Behalf Of > Musial, Ewelina > Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2023 3:39 PM > To: Jani Nikula ; Illipilli, TejasreeX > ; LGCI Bug Filing > ; Andy Shevchenko > > Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/dsi: 4th > attempt to get rid of IOSF GPIO (rev2) > > Hi, I reviewed what I could, and my conclusion is that CI.FULL for > this series was killed due to my work around 126526v6 - yesterday I > was asked to do whatever I can to speed up shards testing for > mentioned series and I killed multiple sessions which were higher in > queue. We do not have option to simply bump priority for premerge > series and the only way (not recommended but sometimes needed) is to > drop everything what is higher. I've added this series back to queue. > Sorry for inconvenience Nope. It was not part of that list. We checked that with Jani too. See those pictures we discussed. > > Regards, > Ewelina Br, Jani S
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/dsi: 4th attempt to get rid of IOSF GPIO (rev2)
HI, > -Original Message- > From: Intel-gfx On Behalf Of Musial, > Ewelina > Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2023 3:39 PM > To: Jani Nikula ; Illipilli, TejasreeX > ; LGCI Bug Filing ; > Andy > Shevchenko > Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/dsi: 4th attempt > to get rid > of IOSF GPIO (rev2) > > Hi, I reviewed what I could, and my conclusion is that CI.FULL for this > series was > killed due to my work around 126526v6 - yesterday I was asked to do whatever I > can to speed up shards testing for mentioned series and I killed multiple > sessions > which were higher in queue. We do not have option to simply bump priority for > premerge series and the only way (not recommended but sometimes needed) is > to drop everything what is higher. I've added this series back to queue. > Sorry for > inconvenience Nope. It was not part of that list. We checked that with Jani too. See those pictures we discussed. > > Regards, > Ewelina Br, Jani S
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/dsi: 4th attempt to get rid of IOSF GPIO (rev2)
Hi, I reviewed what I could, and my conclusion is that CI.FULL for this series was killed due to my work around 126526v6 - yesterday I was asked to do whatever I can to speed up shards testing for mentioned series and I killed multiple sessions which were higher in queue. We do not have option to simply bump priority for premerge series and the only way (not recommended but sometimes needed) is to drop everything what is higher. I've added this series back to queue. Sorry for inconvenience Regards, Ewelina -Original Message- From: Jani Nikula Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2023 11:55 AM To: Illipilli, TejasreeX ; LGCI Bug Filing ; Andy Shevchenko Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org Subject: RE: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/dsi: 4th attempt to get rid of IOSF GPIO (rev2) On Tue, 21 Nov 2023, "Illipilli, TejasreeX" wrote: > Hi , > > https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/125977/ Thanks, I guess, but now what? There are no shards results but the series is not in the shards queue either [1]. I don't know what to do. BR, Jani. [1] https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/queue/index.html#fullshards-queue > > Thanks, > Tejasree > > -Original Message- > From: Jani Nikula > Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2023 10:29 PM > To: LGCI Bug Filing ; Andy Shevchenko > > Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/dsi: 4th > attempt to get rid of IOSF GPIO (rev2) > > On Thu, 16 Nov 2023, Patchwork wrote: >> == Series Details == >> >> Series: drm/i915/dsi: 4th attempt to get rid of IOSF GPIO (rev2) >> URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/125977/ >> State : failure >> >> == Summary == >> >> CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_13883 -> Patchwork_125977v2 >> >> >> Summary >> --- >> >> **FAILURE** >> >> Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_125977v2 absolutely need to >> be >> verified manually. >> >> If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes >> introduced in Patchwork_125977v2, please notify your bug team >> (lgci.bug.fil...@intel.com) to allow them >> to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI. > > The reported issue is unrelated to the series. > > Please consider adding > > Reply-To: lgci.bug.fil...@intel.com > > message header to these status mails, so the right mail gets added > automatically. > > > Thanks, > Jani. > > >> >> External URL: >> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/index.htm >> l >> >> Participating hosts (23 -> 36) >> -- >> >> Additional (16): fi-kbl-7567u fi-skl-guc fi-tgl-1115g4 bat-dg2-9 >> fi-cfl-guc fi-ilk-650 fi-kbl-guc fi-kbl-x1275 fi-pnv-d510 fi-ivb-3770 >> fi-elk-e7500 bat-jsl-3 bat-dg2-14 bat-dg2-13 bat-dg2-11 bat-mtlp-6 >> Missing(3): bat-mtlp-8 fi-snb-2520m bat-dg1-5 >> >> Possible new issues >> --- >> >> Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in >> Patchwork_125977v2: >> >> ### IGT changes ### >> >> Possible regressions >> >> * igt@i915_selftest@live@gt_pm: >> - fi-hsw-4770:NOTRUN -> [INCOMPLETE][1] >>[1]: >> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/fi-hsw-47 >> 7 >> 0/igt@i915_selftest@live@gt_pm.html >> >> >> Known issues >> >> >> Here are the changes found in Patchwork_125977v2 that come from known >> issues: >> >> ### CI changes ### >> >> Possible fixes >> >> * boot: >> - fi-bsw-n3050: [FAIL][2] ([i915#8293]) -> [PASS][3] >>[2]: >> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_13883/fi-bsw-n3050/boot.html >>[3]: >> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/fi-bsw-n3 >> 0 >> 50/boot.html >> >> >> >> ### IGT changes ### >> >> Issues hit >> >> * igt@debugfs_test@basic-hwmon: >> - bat-jsl-3: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][4] ([i915#9318]) >>[4]: >> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/bat-jsl-3/igt@debugfs_t...@basic-hwmon.html >> - fi-tgl-1115g4: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][5] ([i915#9318]) >>[5]: >> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/fi-tgl-1115g4/igt@debugfs_t...@basic-hwmon.html >> - bat-mtlp-6:
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/dsi: 4th attempt to get rid of IOSF GPIO (rev2)
On Tue, 21 Nov 2023, "Illipilli, TejasreeX" wrote: > Hi , > > https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/125977/ Thanks, I guess, but now what? There are no shards results but the series is not in the shards queue either [1]. I don't know what to do. BR, Jani. [1] https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/queue/index.html#fullshards-queue > > Thanks, > Tejasree > > -Original Message- > From: Jani Nikula > Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2023 10:29 PM > To: LGCI Bug Filing ; Andy Shevchenko > > Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/dsi: 4th attempt > to get rid of IOSF GPIO (rev2) > > On Thu, 16 Nov 2023, Patchwork wrote: >> == Series Details == >> >> Series: drm/i915/dsi: 4th attempt to get rid of IOSF GPIO (rev2) >> URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/125977/ >> State : failure >> >> == Summary == >> >> CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_13883 -> Patchwork_125977v2 >> >> >> Summary >> --- >> >> **FAILURE** >> >> Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_125977v2 absolutely need to >> be >> verified manually. >> >> If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes >> introduced in Patchwork_125977v2, please notify your bug team >> (lgci.bug.fil...@intel.com) to allow them >> to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI. > > The reported issue is unrelated to the series. > > Please consider adding > > Reply-To: lgci.bug.fil...@intel.com > > message header to these status mails, so the right mail gets added > automatically. > > > Thanks, > Jani. > > >> >> External URL: >> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/index.html >> >> Participating hosts (23 -> 36) >> -- >> >> Additional (16): fi-kbl-7567u fi-skl-guc fi-tgl-1115g4 bat-dg2-9 >> fi-cfl-guc fi-ilk-650 fi-kbl-guc fi-kbl-x1275 fi-pnv-d510 fi-ivb-3770 >> fi-elk-e7500 bat-jsl-3 bat-dg2-14 bat-dg2-13 bat-dg2-11 bat-mtlp-6 >> Missing(3): bat-mtlp-8 fi-snb-2520m bat-dg1-5 >> >> Possible new issues >> --- >> >> Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in >> Patchwork_125977v2: >> >> ### IGT changes ### >> >> Possible regressions >> >> * igt@i915_selftest@live@gt_pm: >> - fi-hsw-4770:NOTRUN -> [INCOMPLETE][1] >>[1]: >> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/fi-hsw-477 >> 0/igt@i915_selftest@live@gt_pm.html >> >> >> Known issues >> >> >> Here are the changes found in Patchwork_125977v2 that come from known >> issues: >> >> ### CI changes ### >> >> Possible fixes >> >> * boot: >> - fi-bsw-n3050: [FAIL][2] ([i915#8293]) -> [PASS][3] >>[2]: >> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_13883/fi-bsw-n3050/boot.html >>[3]: >> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/fi-bsw-n30 >> 50/boot.html >> >> >> >> ### IGT changes ### >> >> Issues hit >> >> * igt@debugfs_test@basic-hwmon: >> - bat-jsl-3: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][4] ([i915#9318]) >>[4]: >> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/bat-jsl-3/igt@debugfs_t...@basic-hwmon.html >> - fi-tgl-1115g4: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][5] ([i915#9318]) >>[5]: >> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/fi-tgl-1115g4/igt@debugfs_t...@basic-hwmon.html >> - bat-mtlp-6: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][6] ([i915#9318]) >>[6]: >> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/bat-mtlp-6 >> /igt@debugfs_t...@basic-hwmon.html >> >> * igt@fbdev@info: >> - fi-kbl-x1275: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][7] ([fdo#109271] / [i915#1849]) >>[7]: >> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/fi-kbl-x1275/igt@fb...@info.html >> - fi-kbl-guc: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][8] ([fdo#109271] / [i915#1849]) >>[8]: >> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/fi-kbl-guc/igt@fb...@info.html >> - bat-mtlp-6: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][9] ([i915#1849] / [i915#2582]) >>[9]: >> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/bat-mtlp-6 >> /igt@fb...@info.html >&
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/dsi: 4th attempt to get rid of IOSF GPIO (rev2)
Hi , https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/125977/ Thanks, Tejasree -Original Message- From: Jani Nikula Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2023 10:29 PM To: LGCI Bug Filing ; Andy Shevchenko Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/dsi: 4th attempt to get rid of IOSF GPIO (rev2) On Thu, 16 Nov 2023, Patchwork wrote: > == Series Details == > > Series: drm/i915/dsi: 4th attempt to get rid of IOSF GPIO (rev2) > URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/125977/ > State : failure > > == Summary == > > CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_13883 -> Patchwork_125977v2 > > > Summary > --- > > **FAILURE** > > Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_125977v2 absolutely need to be > verified manually. > > If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes > introduced in Patchwork_125977v2, please notify your bug team > (lgci.bug.fil...@intel.com) to allow them > to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI. The reported issue is unrelated to the series. Please consider adding Reply-To: lgci.bug.fil...@intel.com message header to these status mails, so the right mail gets added automatically. Thanks, Jani. > > External URL: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/index.html > > Participating hosts (23 -> 36) > -- > > Additional (16): fi-kbl-7567u fi-skl-guc fi-tgl-1115g4 bat-dg2-9 fi-cfl-guc > fi-ilk-650 fi-kbl-guc fi-kbl-x1275 fi-pnv-d510 fi-ivb-3770 fi-elk-e7500 > bat-jsl-3 bat-dg2-14 bat-dg2-13 bat-dg2-11 bat-mtlp-6 > Missing(3): bat-mtlp-8 fi-snb-2520m bat-dg1-5 > > Possible new issues > --- > > Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in > Patchwork_125977v2: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Possible regressions > > * igt@i915_selftest@live@gt_pm: > - fi-hsw-4770:NOTRUN -> [INCOMPLETE][1] >[1]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/fi-hsw-477 > 0/igt@i915_selftest@live@gt_pm.html > > > Known issues > > > Here are the changes found in Patchwork_125977v2 that come from known > issues: > > ### CI changes ### > > Possible fixes > > * boot: > - fi-bsw-n3050: [FAIL][2] ([i915#8293]) -> [PASS][3] >[2]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_13883/fi-bsw-n3050/boot.html >[3]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/fi-bsw-n30 > 50/boot.html > > > > ### IGT changes ### > > Issues hit > > * igt@debugfs_test@basic-hwmon: > - bat-jsl-3: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][4] ([i915#9318]) >[4]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/bat-jsl-3/igt@debugfs_t...@basic-hwmon.html > - fi-tgl-1115g4: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][5] ([i915#9318]) >[5]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/fi-tgl-1115g4/igt@debugfs_t...@basic-hwmon.html > - bat-mtlp-6: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][6] ([i915#9318]) >[6]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/bat-mtlp-6 > /igt@debugfs_t...@basic-hwmon.html > > * igt@fbdev@info: > - fi-kbl-x1275: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][7] ([fdo#109271] / [i915#1849]) >[7]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/fi-kbl-x1275/igt@fb...@info.html > - fi-kbl-guc: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][8] ([fdo#109271] / [i915#1849]) >[8]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/fi-kbl-guc/igt@fb...@info.html > - bat-mtlp-6: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][9] ([i915#1849] / [i915#2582]) >[9]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/bat-mtlp-6 > /igt@fb...@info.html > > * igt@fbdev@write: > - bat-mtlp-6: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][10] ([i915#2582]) +3 other tests > skip >[10]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/bat-mtlp-6 > /igt@fb...@write.html > > * igt@gem_huc_copy@huc-copy: > - fi-kbl-7567u: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][11] ([fdo#109271] / [i915#2190]) >[11]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/fi-kbl-7567u/igt@gem_huc_c...@huc-copy.html > - fi-ivb-3770:NOTRUN -> [SKIP][12] ([fdo#109271]) +15 other tests > skip >[12]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/fi-ivb-3770/igt@gem_huc_c...@huc-copy.html > - fi-elk-e7500: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][13] ([fdo#109271]) +17 other tests > skip >[13]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.0
Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/dsi: 4th attempt to get rid of IOSF GPIO (rev2)
On Thu, 16 Nov 2023, Patchwork wrote: > == Series Details == > > Series: drm/i915/dsi: 4th attempt to get rid of IOSF GPIO (rev2) > URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/125977/ > State : failure > > == Summary == > > CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_13883 -> Patchwork_125977v2 > > > Summary > --- > > **FAILURE** > > Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_125977v2 absolutely need to be > verified manually. > > If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes > introduced in Patchwork_125977v2, please notify your bug team > (lgci.bug.fil...@intel.com) to allow them > to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI. The reported issue is unrelated to the series. Please consider adding Reply-To: lgci.bug.fil...@intel.com message header to these status mails, so the right mail gets added automatically. Thanks, Jani. > > External URL: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/index.html > > Participating hosts (23 -> 36) > -- > > Additional (16): fi-kbl-7567u fi-skl-guc fi-tgl-1115g4 bat-dg2-9 fi-cfl-guc > fi-ilk-650 fi-kbl-guc fi-kbl-x1275 fi-pnv-d510 fi-ivb-3770 fi-elk-e7500 > bat-jsl-3 bat-dg2-14 bat-dg2-13 bat-dg2-11 bat-mtlp-6 > Missing(3): bat-mtlp-8 fi-snb-2520m bat-dg1-5 > > Possible new issues > --- > > Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in > Patchwork_125977v2: > > ### IGT changes ### > > Possible regressions > > * igt@i915_selftest@live@gt_pm: > - fi-hsw-4770:NOTRUN -> [INCOMPLETE][1] >[1]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/fi-hsw-4770/igt@i915_selftest@live@gt_pm.html > > > Known issues > > > Here are the changes found in Patchwork_125977v2 that come from known > issues: > > ### CI changes ### > > Possible fixes > > * boot: > - fi-bsw-n3050: [FAIL][2] ([i915#8293]) -> [PASS][3] >[2]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_13883/fi-bsw-n3050/boot.html >[3]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/fi-bsw-n3050/boot.html > > > > ### IGT changes ### > > Issues hit > > * igt@debugfs_test@basic-hwmon: > - bat-jsl-3: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][4] ([i915#9318]) >[4]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/bat-jsl-3/igt@debugfs_t...@basic-hwmon.html > - fi-tgl-1115g4: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][5] ([i915#9318]) >[5]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/fi-tgl-1115g4/igt@debugfs_t...@basic-hwmon.html > - bat-mtlp-6: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][6] ([i915#9318]) >[6]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/bat-mtlp-6/igt@debugfs_t...@basic-hwmon.html > > * igt@fbdev@info: > - fi-kbl-x1275: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][7] ([fdo#109271] / [i915#1849]) >[7]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/fi-kbl-x1275/igt@fb...@info.html > - fi-kbl-guc: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][8] ([fdo#109271] / [i915#1849]) >[8]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/fi-kbl-guc/igt@fb...@info.html > - bat-mtlp-6: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][9] ([i915#1849] / [i915#2582]) >[9]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/bat-mtlp-6/igt@fb...@info.html > > * igt@fbdev@write: > - bat-mtlp-6: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][10] ([i915#2582]) +3 other tests > skip >[10]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/bat-mtlp-6/igt@fb...@write.html > > * igt@gem_huc_copy@huc-copy: > - fi-kbl-7567u: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][11] ([fdo#109271] / [i915#2190]) >[11]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/fi-kbl-7567u/igt@gem_huc_c...@huc-copy.html > - fi-ivb-3770:NOTRUN -> [SKIP][12] ([fdo#109271]) +15 other tests > skip >[12]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/fi-ivb-3770/igt@gem_huc_c...@huc-copy.html > - fi-elk-e7500: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][13] ([fdo#109271]) +17 other tests > skip >[13]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/fi-elk-e7500/igt@gem_huc_c...@huc-copy.html > - fi-ilk-650: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][14] ([fdo#109271]) +15 other tests > skip >[14]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/fi-ilk-650/igt@gem_huc_c...@huc-copy.html > - fi-tgl-1115g4: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][15] ([i915#2190]) >[15]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/fi-tgl-1115g4/igt@gem_huc_c...@huc-copy.html > - bat-jsl-3: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][16] ([i915#2190]) >[16]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/bat-jsl-3/igt@gem_huc_c...@huc-copy.html > - fi-kbl-x1275: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][17] ([fdo#109271] / [i915#2190]) >[17]: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/
[Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/dsi: 4th attempt to get rid of IOSF GPIO (rev2)
== Series Details == Series: drm/i915/dsi: 4th attempt to get rid of IOSF GPIO (rev2) URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/125977/ State : failure == Summary == CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_13883 -> Patchwork_125977v2 Summary --- **FAILURE** Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_125977v2 absolutely need to be verified manually. If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes introduced in Patchwork_125977v2, please notify your bug team (lgci.bug.fil...@intel.com) to allow them to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI. External URL: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/index.html Participating hosts (23 -> 36) -- Additional (16): fi-kbl-7567u fi-skl-guc fi-tgl-1115g4 bat-dg2-9 fi-cfl-guc fi-ilk-650 fi-kbl-guc fi-kbl-x1275 fi-pnv-d510 fi-ivb-3770 fi-elk-e7500 bat-jsl-3 bat-dg2-14 bat-dg2-13 bat-dg2-11 bat-mtlp-6 Missing(3): bat-mtlp-8 fi-snb-2520m bat-dg1-5 Possible new issues --- Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in Patchwork_125977v2: ### IGT changes ### Possible regressions * igt@i915_selftest@live@gt_pm: - fi-hsw-4770:NOTRUN -> [INCOMPLETE][1] [1]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/fi-hsw-4770/igt@i915_selftest@live@gt_pm.html Known issues Here are the changes found in Patchwork_125977v2 that come from known issues: ### CI changes ### Possible fixes * boot: - fi-bsw-n3050: [FAIL][2] ([i915#8293]) -> [PASS][3] [2]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_13883/fi-bsw-n3050/boot.html [3]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/fi-bsw-n3050/boot.html ### IGT changes ### Issues hit * igt@debugfs_test@basic-hwmon: - bat-jsl-3: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][4] ([i915#9318]) [4]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/bat-jsl-3/igt@debugfs_t...@basic-hwmon.html - fi-tgl-1115g4: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][5] ([i915#9318]) [5]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/fi-tgl-1115g4/igt@debugfs_t...@basic-hwmon.html - bat-mtlp-6: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][6] ([i915#9318]) [6]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/bat-mtlp-6/igt@debugfs_t...@basic-hwmon.html * igt@fbdev@info: - fi-kbl-x1275: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][7] ([fdo#109271] / [i915#1849]) [7]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/fi-kbl-x1275/igt@fb...@info.html - fi-kbl-guc: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][8] ([fdo#109271] / [i915#1849]) [8]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/fi-kbl-guc/igt@fb...@info.html - bat-mtlp-6: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][9] ([i915#1849] / [i915#2582]) [9]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/bat-mtlp-6/igt@fb...@info.html * igt@fbdev@write: - bat-mtlp-6: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][10] ([i915#2582]) +3 other tests skip [10]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/bat-mtlp-6/igt@fb...@write.html * igt@gem_huc_copy@huc-copy: - fi-kbl-7567u: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][11] ([fdo#109271] / [i915#2190]) [11]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/fi-kbl-7567u/igt@gem_huc_c...@huc-copy.html - fi-ivb-3770:NOTRUN -> [SKIP][12] ([fdo#109271]) +15 other tests skip [12]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/fi-ivb-3770/igt@gem_huc_c...@huc-copy.html - fi-elk-e7500: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][13] ([fdo#109271]) +17 other tests skip [13]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/fi-elk-e7500/igt@gem_huc_c...@huc-copy.html - fi-ilk-650: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][14] ([fdo#109271]) +15 other tests skip [14]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/fi-ilk-650/igt@gem_huc_c...@huc-copy.html - fi-tgl-1115g4: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][15] ([i915#2190]) [15]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/fi-tgl-1115g4/igt@gem_huc_c...@huc-copy.html - bat-jsl-3: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][16] ([i915#2190]) [16]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/bat-jsl-3/igt@gem_huc_c...@huc-copy.html - fi-kbl-x1275: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][17] ([fdo#109271] / [i915#2190]) [17]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/fi-kbl-x1275/igt@gem_huc_c...@huc-copy.html * igt@gem_lmem_swapping@basic: - fi-pnv-d510:NOTRUN -> [SKIP][18] ([fdo#109271]) +25 other tests skip [18]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/fi-pnv-d510/igt@gem_lmem_swapp...@basic.html - bat-jsl-3: NOTRUN -> [SKIP][19] ([i915#4613]) +3 other tests skip [19]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_125977v2/bat-jsl-3/igt@gem_l
