Bug 106744

https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/IGT_4515/fi-byt-n2820/igt@gem_exec_gttfill@basic.html

(gem_exec_gttfill:1501) ioctl_wrappers-CRITICAL: Test assertion failure function gem_execbuf, file ../lib/ioctl_wrappers.c:605:
(gem_exec_gttfill:1501) ioctl_wrappers-CRITICAL: Failed assertion: __gem_execbuf(fd, execbuf) == 0
(gem_exec_gttfill:1501) ioctl_wrappers-CRITICAL: error: -16 != 0
Subtest basic failed.

(In reply to Martin Peres from comment #1)
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/IGT_4515/fi-byt-n2820/
> igt@gem_exec_gttfill@basic.html
> 
> (gem_exec_gttfill:1501) ioctl_wrappers-CRITICAL: Test assertion failure
> function gem_execbuf, file ../lib/ioctl_wrappers.c:605:
> (gem_exec_gttfill:1501) ioctl_wrappers-CRITICAL: Failed assertion:
> __gem_execbuf(fd, execbuf) == 0
> (gem_exec_gttfill:1501) ioctl_wrappers-CRITICAL: error: -16 != 0
> Subtest basic failed.

That is a very different error. EINVAL (original bug) is an igt bug, EBUSY here is a kernel bug.

(In reply to Chris Wilson from comment #2)
> (In reply to Martin Peres from comment #1)
> > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/IGT_4515/fi-byt-n2820/
> > igt@gem_exec_gttfill@basic.html
> > 
> > (gem_exec_gttfill:1501) ioctl_wrappers-CRITICAL: Test assertion failure
> > function gem_execbuf, file ../lib/ioctl_wrappers.c:605:
> > (gem_exec_gttfill:1501) ioctl_wrappers-CRITICAL: Failed assertion:
> > __gem_execbuf(fd, execbuf) == 0
> > (gem_exec_gttfill:1501) ioctl_wrappers-CRITICAL: error: -16 != 0
> > Subtest basic failed.
> 
> That is a very different error. EINVAL (original bug) is an igt bug, EBUSY
> here is a kernel bug.

Gone.

commit 827db9d8bb4a01314f214065e3f18c8345c5fc9f
Author: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Date:   Thu Jun 21 08:32:05 2018 +0100

    drm/i915: Ignore applying the self-relocation BIAS if no relocations
    
    We only need to apply the BIAS for self-relocations into the batchbuffer
    iff the execobject has any relocations.
    
    This suppresses some warnings we may get with a full gtt (so the batch
    object has wound up at 0 from a previous invocation), but doesn't fix
    the underlying problem of how we tried to move a pinned batch vma (how
    we have a pinned user vma outside of execbuf, I do not know, though this
    being on an aliasing ppgtt means it could be a spurious pinning via the
    global gtt). One step at a time...
    
    References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=106744#c1
    Testcase: igt/gem_exec_gttfill # byt (sporadic)
    Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
    Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>
    Reviewed-by: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>
    Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20180621073205.26701-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk

commit d20ac620f0010f9cdcbbe8408e5f22aae3c49faa
Author: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Date:   Thu Jun 21 09:01:50 2018 +0100

    drm/i915: Redefine EINVAL for debugging
    
    To aide debugging spurious EINVALs, include a debug message every time
    we emit one from execbuf.
    
    References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=106744
    Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
    Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>
    Reviewed-by: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>
    Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20180621080150.8110-1-ch
ris@chris-wilson.co.uk

To test CI bug snooping.

(In reply to Chris Wilson from comment #5)
> To test CI bug snooping.

Last seen in https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_4370_99/fi-byt-n2820/igt@gem_exec_gttfill@basic.html, 1 month and 2 weeks ago. It used to be seen every single run, so it is safe to say it is fixed!