On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 01:37:46PM +0300, Petri Latvala wrote: > > >>Are the test run in the order defined by fast-feedback.testlist ? > >>I intended the vgem unload test to be run as the first vgem testcase to > >>minimise the chance of a stray module leak. Can we define the order within > >>CI? Can we put comments into fast-feedback.testlist ? > >My understanding, yes, we are running on that order. > >Adding comment, no I think no, Petri, Tomi? > > > > Order: Yes, that order. I'm waiting for an opportune moment to test > a patch to sleep-and-retry in vgem unload to prune out the cases of > just having soon-to-finish work left over. Just need to tune the > amount of retries and sleeping. > > We can also order vgem unload test to be first (along with > drv_module_reload) depending on whether we want to catch those stray > module leaks. Comments on that tradeoff? I planned on having vgem/unload be the first vgem test. It probably makes sense to have a second one at the end to catch a leak over the run. -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
