Created attachment 108145 [details] dmesg ==System Environment== -------------------------- Regression: not sure Non-working platforms: BDW ==kernel== -------------------------- drm-intel-nightly/f2bcbc348f1b20b47f98976aa812d4540c3d9951 ==Bug detailed description== ----------------------------- Run 5 cycles on BDW with -nightly kernel. It's skip on the first cycle. output: root@x-bdw05:/GFX/Test/Intel_gpu_tools/intel-gpu-tools/tests# ./gem_bad_reloc --run-subtest negative-reloc IGT-Version: 1.8-gbba1cd0 (x86_64) (Linux: 3.18.0-rc1_drm-intel-nightly_f2bcbc_20141021+ x86_64) Found offset 8912896 for 4k batch Test requirement not met in function negative_reloc, file gem_bad_reloc.c:90: Test requirement: gem_exec[0].offset < BIAS Subtest negative-reloc: SKIP (0.000s) root@x-bdw05:/GFX/Test/Intel_gpu_tools/intel-gpu-tools/tests# ./gem_bad_reloc --run-subtest negative-reloc IGT-Version: 1.8-gbba1cd0 (x86_64) (Linux: 3.18.0-rc1_drm-intel-nightly_f2bcbc_20141021+ x86_64) Found offset 73728 for 4k batch Batch is now at offset 266240 Subtest negative-reloc: SUCCESS (0.000s) root@x-bdw05:/GFX/Test/Intel_gpu_tools/intel-gpu-tools/tests# ./gem_bad_reloc --run-subtest negative-reloc IGT-Version: 1.8-gbba1cd0 (x86_64) (Linux: 3.18.0-rc1_drm-intel-nightly_f2bcbc_20141021+ x86_64) Found offset 73728 for 4k batch Batch is now at offset 262144 Subtest negative-reloc: SUCCESS (0.001s) root@x-bdw05:/GFX/Test/Intel_gpu_tools/intel-gpu-tools/tests# ./gem_bad_reloc --run-subtest negative-reloc IGT-Version: 1.8-gbba1cd0 (x86_64) (Linux: 3.18.0-rc1_drm-intel-nightly_f2bcbc_20141021+ x86_64) Found offset 73728 for 4k batch Batch is now at offset 262144 Subtest negative-reloc: SUCCESS (0.000s) root@x-bdw05:/GFX/Test/Intel_gpu_tools/intel-gpu-tools/tests# ./gem_bad_reloc --run-subtest negative-reloc IGT-Version: 1.8-gbba1cd0 (x86_64) (Linux: 3.18.0-rc1_drm-intel-nightly_f2bcbc_20141021+ x86_64) Found offset 73728 for 4k batch Batch is now at offset 266240 Subtest negative-reloc: SUCCESS (0.000s) ==Reproduce steps== ---------------------------- 1. ./gem_bad_reloc --run-subtest negative-reloc
Just means that in that space of memory the object got allocated doesn't need to be tested. So skipping. not a failure.
(In reply to Rodrigo Vivi from comment #1) > Just means that in that space of memory the object got allocated doesn't > need to be tested. So skipping. not a failure. It has different result when run multiple rounds on one machine. It's difficult to track the result.
The failure is able to reproduce on BYT latest -nightly(691817ae2a8f37cb1df33f21a6dd1c15a8832693) root@x-byt06:/GFX/Test/Intel_gpu_tools/intel-gpu-tools/tests# dmesg -r|egrep "<[1-4]>"|grep drm root@x-byt06:/GFX/Test/Intel_gpu_tools/intel-gpu-tools/tests# ./gem_bad_reloc --run-subtest negative-reloc IGT-Version: 1.8-g4e5c16c (x86_64) (Linux: 3.18.0-rc7_drm-intel-nightly_691817_20141202+ x86_64) Found offset 17035264 for 4k batch Test requirement not met in function negative_reloc, file gem_bad_reloc.c:90: Test requirement: gem_exec[0].offset < BIAS Subtest negative-reloc: SKIP (0.000s) root@x-byt06:/GFX/Test/Intel_gpu_tools/intel-gpu-tools/tests# ./gem_bad_reloc --run-subtest negative-reloc-lut IGT-Version: 1.8-g4e5c16c (x86_64) (Linux: 3.18.0-rc7_drm-intel-nightly_691817_20141202+ x86_64) Found offset 17035264 for 4k batch Test requirement not met in function negative_reloc, file gem_bad_reloc.c:90: Test requirement: gem_exec[0].offset < BIAS Subtest negative-reloc-lut: SKIP (0.000s)
Pushed a work-around in i-g-t: commit 88ff1cec3a830fc467b91efb7e1dcdb4d82a0e17 Author: Damien Lespiau <damien.lespiau@intel.com> Date: Thu Dec 4 13:42:12 2014 +0000 gem_bad_reloc: Don't flip-flop between SKIP and PASS Here is a cheap way for this test to give consistent results. This doesn't change the usefulness of this test, hopefully. Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=85270 Acked-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> Signed-off-by: Damien Lespiau <damien.lespiau@intel.com>
Verified.Fixed.
Closing old verified.
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.