Bug 111617 - [CI][RESUME] igt@kms_big_fb@y-tiled-(8|16|32|64)-rotate-(0|90|180|270) - fail - Failed assertion: !mismatch || igt_skip_crc_compare
Summary: [CI][RESUME] igt@kms_big_fb@y-tiled-(8|16|32|64)-rotate-(0|90|180|270) - fail...
Status: NEW
Alias: None
Product: DRI
Classification: Unclassified
Component: DRM/Intel (show other bugs)
Version: XOrg git
Hardware: Other All
: high not set
Assignee: Intel GFX Bugs mailing list
QA Contact: Intel GFX Bugs mailing list
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2019-09-09 12:35 UTC by Martin Peres
Modified: 2019-09-18 12:47 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

See Also:
i915 platform: TGL
i915 features: display/Other


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Martin Peres 2019-09-09 12:35:39 UTC
https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/drmtip_364/fi-tgl-u/igt@kms_big_fb@y-tiled-32bpp-rotate-270.html

Starting subtest: y-tiled-32bpp-rotate-270
(kms_big_fb:1008) igt_debugfs-CRITICAL: Test assertion failure function igt_assert_crc_equal, file ../lib/igt_debugfs.c:426:
(kms_big_fb:1008) igt_debugfs-CRITICAL: Failed assertion: !mismatch || igt_skip_crc_compare
Comment 1 CI Bug Log 2019-09-09 12:36:13 UTC
The CI Bug Log issue associated to this bug has been updated.

### New filters associated

* TGL: igt@kms_big_fb@y-tiled-(8|16|32|64)-rotate-(0|90|180|270) - fail - Failed assertion: !mismatch || igt_skip_crc_compare
  - https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/drmtip_363/fi-tgl-u/igt@kms_big_fb@y-tiled-32bpp-rotate-0.html
  - https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/drmtip_363/fi-tgl-u/igt@kms_big_fb@y-tiled-32bpp-rotate-270.html
  - https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/drmtip_363/fi-tgl-u/igt@kms_big_fb@y-tiled-8bpp-rotate-180.html
  - https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/drmtip_363/fi-tgl-u/igt@kms_big_fb@y-tiled-32bpp-rotate-90.html
  - https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/drmtip_363/fi-tgl-u/igt@kms_big_fb@y-tiled-8bpp-rotate-0.html
  - https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/drmtip_364/fi-tgl-u/igt@kms_big_fb@y-tiled-32bpp-rotate-0.html
  - https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/drmtip_364/fi-tgl-u/igt@kms_big_fb@y-tiled-32bpp-rotate-270.html
  - https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/drmtip_364/fi-tgl-u/igt@kms_big_fb@y-tiled-8bpp-rotate-180.html
  - https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/drmtip_364/fi-tgl-u/igt@kms_big_fb@y-tiled-32bpp-rotate-90.html
  - https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/drmtip_364/fi-tgl-u/igt@kms_big_fb@y-tiled-16bpp-rotate-90.html
  - https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/drmtip_364/fi-tgl-u/igt@kms_big_fb@y-tiled-8bpp-rotate-0.html
  - https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/drmtip_364/fi-tgl-u/igt@kms_big_fb@y-tiled-32bpp-rotate-180.html
Comment 3 Ville Syrjala 2019-09-16 12:12:08 UTC
We probably shouldn't put all crc fails into the same bug.
Comment 4 Uma Shankar 2019-09-16 12:56:56 UTC
I agree with Ville. Most of our IGT validation is around crc. There are some limitations when color processing is done (degamma/ctm/gamma), so we may have some crc mismatches due to interpolation and rounding. But that's about it, all other tests are expected to work with crc matching properly (unless proved otherwise with some debug data).

We should keep the color tests separate from rest of the IGT test failing due to crc mismatches.
Comment 5 CI Bug Log 2019-09-16 13:23:47 UTC
The CI Bug Log issue associated to this bug has been updated.

### Removed filters

* TGL: igt@kms_color@pipe-[abc]-degamma - fail - Failed assertion: !mismatch || igt_skip_crc_compare (added on 6 days, 2 hours ago)
Comment 6 Lakshmi 2019-09-16 13:33:55 UTC
As suggested, I have created separate issues for crc mismatch failures for kms_color tests (Bug 111702) and kms_cursor_crc tests (Bug 111703).
Comment 7 Juha-Pekka Heikkilä 2019-09-16 19:26:19 UTC
Looking at the logs it seems big_fb test is running normally so would be good to see how it look on screen when crc error happen.
Comment 8 Lakshmi 2019-09-18 12:47:14 UTC
At the moment crc mismatches are not seen under this bug.


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.