Bug 106865

Summary:	[GLK] piglit.spec.ext_framebuffer_multisample.accuracy stencil tests fail
Product:	Mesa	Reporter:	Clayton Craft <clayton.a.craft>
Component:	Drivers/DRI/i965	Assignee:	Nanley Chery <nanleychery>
Status:	RESOLVED FIXED	QA Contact:	Intel 3D Bugs Mailing List <intel-3d-bugs>
Severity:	normal
Priority:	medium	CC:	agomez
Version:	git
Hardware:	Other
OS:	All
Whiteboard:
i915 platform:		i915 features:
Bug Depends on:
Bug Blocks:	106156, 107457

Description Clayton Craft 2018-06-08 16:52:30 UTC

This seems to only affect HD600 (2x6), and not HD605 (3x6).


List of failing tests:

piglit.spec.ext_framebuffer_multisample.accuracy 6 depth_draw small depthstencil
piglit.spec.ext_framebuffer_multisample.accuracy 8 stencil_draw small depthstencil
piglit.spec.ext_framebuffer_multisample.accuracy 6 stencil_draw small depthstencil
piglit.spec.ext_framebuffer_multisample.accuracy 8 depth_resolve small
piglit.spec.ext_framebuffer_multisample.accuracy 6 stencil_resolve small depthstencil
piglit.spec.ext_framebuffer_multisample.accuracy 4 stencil_draw small depthstencil
piglit.spec.ext_framebuffer_multisample.accuracy 16 stencil_draw small depthstencil
piglit.spec.ext_framebuffer_multisample.accuracy 16 depth_draw small depthstencil
piglit.spec.ext_framebuffer_multisample.accuracy 2 stencil_resolve small depthstencil
piglit.spec.ext_framebuffer_multisample.accuracy 6 stencil_draw small
piglit.spec.ext_framebuffer_multisample.accuracy all_samples stencil_draw small
piglit.spec.ext_framebuffer_multisample.accuracy 2 depth_draw small depthstencil
piglit.spec.ext_framebuffer_multisample.accuracy all_samples depth_draw small depthstencil
piglit.spec.ext_framebuffer_multisample.accuracy all_samples stencil_resolve small
piglit.spec.ext_framebuffer_multisample.accuracy 4 depth_draw small depthstencil
piglit.spec.ext_framebuffer_multisample.accuracy all_samples depth_draw small
piglit.spec.ext_framebuffer_multisample.accuracy all_samples stencil_draw small depthstencil
piglit.spec.ext_framebuffer_multisample.accuracy 4 stencil_resolve small depthstencil
piglit.spec.ext_framebuffer_multisample.accuracy 4 depth_resolve small depthstencil
piglit.spec.ext_framebuffer_multisample.accuracy all_samples stencil_resolve small depthstencil




Output from one of the failing tests:

/tmp/build_root/m64/lib/piglit/bin/ext_framebuffer_multisample-accuracy 6 depth_draw small depthstencil -auto -fbo
Pixels that should be unlit
  count = 126470
  Perfect output
Pixels that should be totally lit
  count = 131408
  RMS error = 0.141088
The error threshold for unlit and totally lit pixels test is 0.010323
Pixels that should be partially lit
  count = 4266
  RMS error = 0.077997
The error threshold for partially lit pixels is 0.206460

Comment 1 Denis 2018-06-14 09:22:26 UTC

Hi Clayton, could you please clarify GPU models, marked as "HD600 (2x6), and not HD605 (3x6)?
I wanna dig into this, but not sure whether I have needed configurations.

Comment 2 Mark Janes 2018-06-18 21:21:44 UTC

HD605:
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16856102204

HD600:
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16856102203

Comment 3 Nanley Chery 2018-08-17 17:46:21 UTC

A common theme among these failing tests is that they all have the "small" option enabled.

Comment 4 Nanley Chery 2018-08-20 21:14:47 UTC

Running the tests with INTEL_DEBUG=sync causes them to pass.

Comment 5 Nanley Chery 2018-08-20 22:29:26 UTC

INTEL_DEBUG=reemit is similarly useful.(In reply to Nanley Chery from comment #4)
> Running the tests with INTEL_DEBUG=sync causes them to pass.

INTEL_DEBUG=reemit is similarly useful.

Comment 6 Nanley Chery 2018-08-21 23:19:02 UTC

Hacking to driver to disable push constants also makes the tests pass.

Comment 7 Kenneth Graunke 2018-08-23 03:21:33 UTC

You don't even need to re-emit everything, just re-emitting 3DSTATE_PUSH_CONSTANT_ALLOC_* fixes it.

Comment 8 Andrés Gómez García 2018-08-24 15:45:11 UTC

Nanley, Kenneth, any news on this bug ?

Notice that I've extenced the Release Candidates period for 18.2 in order to get room for fixing blockers from bug 107457.

If you don't think this can be solved in a reasonable period of time we should target for 18.3 and warn in the release notes about this known bug.

Please, let me know as soon as possible.

Comment 9 Andrés Gómez García 2018-08-24 15:46:25 UTC

Additionally, which is the reason for blocking mesa-18.2 ? If this is a regression, do we have a bisect of it?

Comment 10 Nanley Chery 2018-08-24 23:38:17 UTC

(In reply to Andrés Gómez García from comment #8)
> Nanley, Kenneth, any news on this bug ?
> 
> Notice that I've extenced the Release Candidates period for 18.2 in order to
> get room for fixing blockers from bug 107457.
> 
> If you don't think this can be solved in a reasonable period of time we
> should target for 18.3 and warn in the release notes about this known bug.
> 
> Please, let me know as soon as possible.

Hi Andrés,

Thank you for the extra time. We have a fix for this bug going through CI and I will send it out to the list shortly.

Comment 11 Nanley Chery 2018-08-25 00:49:58 UTC

The fix for this bug (and mitigation for the issue) is on the list:
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/245950/

Comment 12 Nanley Chery 2018-08-29 20:41:52 UTC

v2: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/246461/

Comment 13 Nanley Chery 2018-08-30 23:34:19 UTC

Thank you for the report. This should be fixed by:

commit 4a57b997092851a2c5e170bb1b58787524006704 
Author: Nanley Chery <nanley.g.chery@intel.com>
Date:   Wed Aug 22 10:43:32 2018 -0700

    i965/gen7_urb: Re-emit PUSH_CONSTANT_ALLOC on some gen9

Comment 14 Nanley Chery 2018-08-31 20:24:11 UTC

Looks like I actually failed to push the fix. It's upstream now and the commit is 904c2a617d86944fbdc2c955f327aacd0b3df318 .

Use of freedesktop.org services, including Bugzilla, is subject to our Code of Conduct. How we collect and use information is described in our Privacy Policy.