Bug 105454 - [CI] igt@kms_cursor_legacy@2x-long-nonblocking-modeset-vs-cursor-atomic - fail - Test assertion failure function two_screens_flip_vs_cursor - Failed assertion: vblank_matches
Summary: [CI] igt@kms_cursor_legacy@2x-long-nonblocking-modeset-vs-cursor-atomic - fai...
Status: NEW
Alias: None
Product: DRI
Classification: Unclassified
Component: DRM/Intel (show other bugs)
Version: DRI git
Hardware: Other All
: medium normal
Assignee: Nischala Yelchuri
QA Contact: Intel GFX Bugs mailing list
URL:
Whiteboard: ReadyForDev
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2018-03-12 11:51 UTC by Marta Löfstedt
Modified: 2019-03-07 07:34 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

See Also:
i915 platform: CFL, CNL, GLK, ICL, KBL, SKL
i915 features: display/Other


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Marta Löfstedt 2018-03-12 11:51:57 UTC
https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_3903/fi-cnl-y3/igt@kms_cursor_legacy@2x-long-nonblocking-modeset-vs-cursor-atomic.html

(kms_cursor_legacy:1229) CRITICAL: Test assertion failure function two_screens_flip_vs_cursor, file kms_cursor_legacy.c:1013:
(kms_cursor_legacy:1229) CRITICAL: Failed assertion: vblank_matches
(kms_cursor_legacy:1229) CRITICAL: Last errno: 25, Inappropriate ioctl for device
(kms_cursor_legacy:1229) CRITICAL: During modeset at least 1 page flip needs to match!
Subtest 2x-long-nonblocking-modeset-vs-cursor-atomic failed.
Comment 1 Marta Löfstedt 2018-03-12 12:35:31 UTC
https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_3903/fi-cfl-s2/igt@kms_cursor_legacy@2x-nonblocking-modeset-vs-cursor-atomic.html

(kms_cursor_legacy:1664) CRITICAL: Test assertion failure function two_screens_flip_vs_cursor, file kms_cursor_legacy.c:1013:
(kms_cursor_legacy:1664) CRITICAL: Failed assertion: vblank_matches
(kms_cursor_legacy:1664) CRITICAL: Last errno: 25, Inappropriate ioctl for device
(kms_cursor_legacy:1664) CRITICAL: During modeset at least 1 page flip needs to match!
Subtest 2x-nonblocking-modeset-vs-cursor-atomic failed.
Comment 2 Marta Löfstedt 2018-03-16 07:47:23 UTC
Now we have more data from shardlist on BAT machines:
(kms_cursor_legacy:2899) CRITICAL: Test assertion failure function two_screens_flip_vs_cursor, file ../tests/kms_cursor_legacy.c:1013:
(kms_cursor_legacy:2899) CRITICAL: Failed assertion: vblank_matches
(kms_cursor_legacy:2899) CRITICAL: Last errno: 25, Inappropriate ioctl for device
(kms_cursor_legacy:2899) CRITICAL: During modeset at least 1 page flip needs to match!

https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/drmtip_1/fi-skl-6770hq/igt@kms_cursor_legacy@2x-long-nonblocking-modeset-vs-cursor-atomic.html
https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/drmtip_1/fi-skl-6770hq/igt@kms_cursor_legacy@2x-nonblocking-modeset-vs-cursor-atomic.html
https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/drmtip_1/fi-kbl-7500u/igt@kms_cursor_legacy@2x-nonblocking-modeset-vs-cursor-atomic.html
Comment 3 Marta Löfstedt 2018-03-19 08:12:41 UTC
https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/drmtip_2/fi-skl-6700k2/igt@kms_cursor_legacy@2x-nonblocking-modeset-vs-cursor-atomic.html

(kms_cursor_legacy:3829) CRITICAL: Test assertion failure function two_screens_flip_vs_cursor, file ../tests/kms_cursor_legacy.c:1013:
(kms_cursor_legacy:3829) CRITICAL: Failed assertion: vblank_matches
(kms_cursor_legacy:3829) CRITICAL: Last errno: 25, Inappropriate ioctl for device
(kms_cursor_legacy:3829) CRITICAL: During modeset at least 1 page flip needs to match!
Subtest 2x-nonblocking-modeset-vs-cursor-atomic failed.
Comment 4 Marta Löfstedt 2018-03-19 15:03:32 UTC
https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/drmtip_3/fi-skl-guc/igt@kms_cursor_legacy@2x-nonblocking-modeset-vs-cursor-atomic.html	

(kms_cursor_legacy:1983) CRITICAL: Test assertion failure function two_screens_flip_vs_cursor, file ../tests/kms_cursor_legacy.c:1013:
(kms_cursor_legacy:1983) CRITICAL: Failed assertion: vblank_matches
(kms_cursor_legacy:1983) CRITICAL: Last errno: 25, Inappropriate ioctl for device
(kms_cursor_legacy:1983) CRITICAL: During modeset at least 1 page flip needs to match!
Subtest 2x-nonblocking-modeset-vs-cursor-atomic failed.
Comment 5 Marta Löfstedt 2018-03-27 09:57:03 UTC
https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/drmtip_7/fi-cfl-s3/igt@kms_cursor_legacy@2x-nonblocking-modeset-vs-cursor-atomic.html

(kms_cursor_legacy:2041) CRITICAL: Test assertion failure function two_screens_flip_vs_cursor, file ../tests/kms_cursor_legacy.c:1013:
(kms_cursor_legacy:2041) CRITICAL: Failed assertion: vblank_matches
(kms_cursor_legacy:2041) CRITICAL: Last errno: 25, Inappropriate ioctl for device
(kms_cursor_legacy:2041) CRITICAL: During modeset at least 1 page flip needs to match!
Subtest 2x-nonblocking-modeset-vs-cursor-atomic failed.
Comment 7 Martin Peres 2018-10-15 10:05:45 UTC
https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/drmtip_127/fi-icl-u2/igt@kms_cursor_legacy@2x-nonblocking-modeset-vs-cursor-atomic.html

Starting subtest: 2x-nonblocking-modeset-vs-cursor-atomic
(kms_cursor_legacy:2133) CRITICAL: Test assertion failure function two_screens_flip_vs_cursor, file ../tests/kms_cursor_legacy.c:1014:
(kms_cursor_legacy:2133) CRITICAL: Failed assertion: vblank_matches
(kms_cursor_legacy:2133) CRITICAL: Last errno: 25, Inappropriate ioctl for device
(kms_cursor_legacy:2133) CRITICAL: During modeset at least 1 page flip needs to match!
Subtest 2x-nonblocking-modeset-vs-cursor-atomic failed.
Comment 8 Maarten Lankhorst 2018-12-11 12:57:41 UTC
How frequently does this trip?
Comment 9 Nischala Yelchuri 2019-03-02 00:12:15 UTC
This change fixes the failure:

--- a/tests/kms_cursor_legacy.c
+++ b/tests/kms_cursor_legacy.c
@@ -976,7 +976,7 @@ static void two_screens_flip_vs_cursor(igt_display_t *display, int nloops, bool
                if (!modeset)
                        igt_assert_eq(vbl.sequence, vblank_start + 1);

-               if (vblank_start && vbl.sequence == vblank_start + 1)
+               if (vblank_start && vbl.sequence >= vblank_start + 1)
                        vblank_matches = true;

The test says: "During modeset at least 1 page flip needs to match!" I am not sure if this is the right fix.
Comment 10 Jani Saarinen 2019-03-07 07:17:58 UTC
Is patch sent for review?
Comment 11 Nischala Yelchuri 2019-03-07 07:34:29 UTC
(In reply to Jani Saarinen from comment #10)
> Is patch sent for review?

Yes, I have posted it for review.


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.