Bug 108889

Also seen on SKL: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/drmtip_149/fi-skl-6770hq/igt@sw_sync@sync_busy_fork.html

Starting subtest: sync_busy_fork
sw_sync: ../lib/igt_core.c:1592: __igt_fork_helper: Assertion `!proc->running' failed.
Received signal SIGABRT.

So why was this marked incomplete and not CRASH?

(In reply to Chris Wilson from comment #2)
> So why was this marked incomplete and not CRASH?

+1

A CI Bug Log filter associated to this bug has been updated:

{- SKL ICL: igt@sw_sync@sync_busy_fork* - incomplete - __igt_fork_helper: Assertion `!proc->running' failed. -}
{+ HSW SKL ICL: igt@sw_sync@sync_busy_fork* - incomplete - __igt_fork_helper: Assertion `!proc->running' failed. +}

New failures caught by the filter:

* https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/drmtip_186/fi-hsw-peppy/igt@sw_sync@sync_busy_fork_unixsocket.html

A CI Bug Log filter associated to this bug has been updated:

{- HSW SKL ICL: igt@sw_sync@sync_busy_fork* - incomplete - __igt_fork_helper: Assertion `!proc->running' failed. -}
{+ HSW SKL KBL ICL: igt@sw_sync@sync_busy_fork* - incomplete - __igt_fork_helper: Assertion `!proc->running' failed. +}

New failures caught by the filter:

* https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/drmtip_191/fi-kbl-r/igt@sw_sync@sync_busy_fork.html

The CI Bug Log issue associated to this bug has been updated.

### New filters associated

* BLB BWR HSW BSW: Incomplete - igt_stop_helper: Assertion `helper_was_alive(proc, status)' failed
  - https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/drmtip_195/fi-blb-e6850/igt@sw_sync@sync_busy_fork.html
  - https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/drmtip_195/fi-bsw-n3050/igt@sw_sync@sync_busy_fork.html
  - https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/drmtip_189/fi-hsw-peppy/igt@sw_sync@sync_busy_fork.html
  - https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/drmtip_194/fi-bwr-2160/igt@sw_sync@sync_busy_fork.html

commit 93c6b1ca84866fabe4601b1e93145209e4df1177
Author: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Date:   Wed Jan 30 22:16:39 2019 +0000

    sw_sync: Initialise struct before use
    
    sw_sync: ../lib/igt_core.c:1592: __igt_fork_helper: Assertion `!proc->running'
    
    Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=108889
    Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
    Reviewed-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>

(In reply to Chris Wilson from comment #7)
> commit 93c6b1ca84866fabe4601b1e93145209e4df1177
> Author: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> Date:   Wed Jan 30 22:16:39 2019 +0000
> 
>     sw_sync: Initialise struct before use
>     
>     sw_sync: ../lib/igt_core.c:1592: __igt_fork_helper: Assertion
> `!proc->running'
>     
>     Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=108889
>     Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
>     Reviewed-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>

Thanks, but we still get the following :)

https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/drmtip_231/fi-bsw-n3050/igt@sw_sync@sync_busy_fork.html

Starting subtest: sync_busy_fork
sw_sync: ../lib/igt_core.c:1693: igt_stop_helper: Assertion `helper_was_alive(proc, status)' failed.
Received signal SIGABRT.
Stack trace: 
 #0 [fatal_sig_handler+0xd5]
 #1 [killpg+0x40]
 #2 [gsignal+0xc7]
 #3 [abort+0x141]
 #4 [uselocale+0x33a]
 #5 [__assert_fail+0x42]
 #6 [igt_stop_helper+0xc3]
 #7 [test_sync_busy_fork+0x10e]
 #8 [__real_main860+0x1bc]
 #9 [main+0x44]
 #10 [__libc_start_main+0xe7]
 #11 [_start+0x2a]

commit 520b6f7fbb6cb7dc99d689cc6c073fae1ccc8e7f
Author: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Date:   Fri Mar 15 23:00:33 2019 +0000

    sw_sync: Wait until the end
    
    If we allow a fork-helper to exit normally before the parent tries to
    reap the helper (fork-helpers are intended to be only used for
    persistent background loads), then the helper unhelpful aborts because
    the child exited cleanly.
    
    Simplify by not using the so called helpers at all.
    
    Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=108889
    Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>

Accidentally pushed, but worksforme so I hope no one notices.

The CI Bug Log issue associated to this bug has been archived.

New failures matching the above filters will not be associated to this bug anymore.