Message ID | 20250227-improve-type-safey-power-domain-macros-v3-0-b6eaa00f9c33@intel.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
Headers | show |
Series | Improve type-safety on POWER_DOMAIN_*() macros | expand |
Whoops... This should've been v4. Let's see how Patchwork and CI will react. -- Gustavo Sousa Quoting Gustavo Sousa (2025-02-27 18:09:11-03:00) >Fix one issue[1] reported by the kernel test robot and also take this >opportunity to improve POWER_DOMAIN_*() macros by making them explicitly >return the expected enum type with patch #2. > >I decided to send this new version with patch #3 dropped in order to get >CI results and merge the already reviewed patches #1 and #2. Patch #3 >from the previous version is still under discussion and will probably be >respinned as a standalone patch. > >[1] https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202502120809.XfmcqkBD-lkp@intel.com/ > >--- >Gustavo Sousa (2): > drm/i915/display: Use explicit base values in POWER_DOMAIN_*() macros > drm/i915/display: Make POWER_DOMAIN_*() always result in enum intel_display_power_domain > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h | 7 ++++--- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >--- >base-commit: 6badede10d92c242241bd7bf59a5488b5eba5aa7 >change-id: 20250227-improve-type-safey-power-domain-macros-8bf2a14f43f9 > >Best regards, >-- >Gustavo Sousa <gustavo.sousa@intel.com> >
Quoting Patchwork (2025-02-28 07:09:40-03:00) >== Series Details == > >Series: Improve type-safety on POWER_DOMAIN_*() macros (rev4) >URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/144726/ >State : failure > >== Summary == > >CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_16198_full -> Patchwork_144726v4_full >==================================================== > >Summary >------- > > **FAILURE** > > Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_144726v4_full absolutely need to be > verified manually. > > If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes > introduced in Patchwork_144726v4_full, please notify your bug team (I915-ci-infra@lists.freedesktop.org) to allow them > to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI. > > > >Participating hosts (10 -> 10) >------------------------------ > > No changes in participating hosts > >Possible new issues >------------------- > > Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in Patchwork_144726v4_full: > >### IGT changes ### > >#### Possible regressions #### > > * igt@gem_exec_parallel@fds@bcs0: > - shard-dg1: [PASS][1] -> [INCOMPLETE][2] +1 other test incomplete > [1]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_16198/shard-dg1-16/igt@gem_exec_parallel@fds@bcs0.html > [2]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_144726v4/shard-dg1-12/igt@gem_exec_parallel@fds@bcs0.html If we look at https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_144726v4/shard-dg1-12/dmesg1.txt , we can see that the dynamic subtest actually passed. So the INCOMPLETE here is possibly a result of some sync failure in CI tooling. > > * igt@kms_flip@plain-flip-ts-check-interruptible@c-hdmi-a1: > - shard-tglu: [PASS][3] -> [FAIL][4] +2 other tests fail > [3]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_16198/shard-tglu-4/igt@kms_flip@plain-flip-ts-check-interruptible@c-hdmi-a1.html > [4]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_144726v4/shard-tglu-10/igt@kms_flip@plain-flip-ts-check-interruptible@c-hdmi-a1.html > > * igt@kms_flip@wf_vblank-ts-check@b-vga1: > - shard-snb: [PASS][5] -> [FAIL][6] > [5]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_16198/shard-snb1/igt@kms_flip@wf_vblank-ts-check@b-vga1.html > [6]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_144726v4/shard-snb5/igt@kms_flip@wf_vblank-ts-check@b-vga1.html Those two are possibly related to https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/i915/kernel/-/issues/13734 . > > * igt@perf_pmu@module-unload: > - shard-tglu-1: NOTRUN -> [INCOMPLETE][7] > [7]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_144726v4/shard-tglu-1/igt@perf_pmu@module-unload.html Possibly related to https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/i915/kernel/-/issues/13029 . -- Gustavo Sousa
Quoting Gustavo Sousa (2025-02-27 18:09:11-03:00) >Fix one issue[1] reported by the kernel test robot and also take this >opportunity to improve POWER_DOMAIN_*() macros by making them explicitly >return the expected enum type with patch #2. > >I decided to send this new version with patch #3 dropped in order to get >CI results and merge the already reviewed patches #1 and #2. Patch #3 >from the previous version is still under discussion and will probably be >respinned as a standalone patch. Pushed to drm-intel-next. Thank you all for the review/feedback. -- Gustavo Sousa > >[1] https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202502120809.XfmcqkBD-lkp@intel.com/ > >--- >Gustavo Sousa (2): > drm/i915/display: Use explicit base values in POWER_DOMAIN_*() macros > drm/i915/display: Make POWER_DOMAIN_*() always result in enum intel_display_power_domain > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h | 7 ++++--- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >--- >base-commit: 6badede10d92c242241bd7bf59a5488b5eba5aa7 >change-id: 20250227-improve-type-safey-power-domain-macros-8bf2a14f43f9 > >Best regards, >-- >Gustavo Sousa <gustavo.sousa@intel.com> >