On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 04:38:12PM +0200, Joonas Lahtinen wrote: > On pe, 2016-12-16 at 07:46 +0000, Chris Wilson wrote: > > Check that after applying the driver's color adjustment, eviction > > scanning find a suitable hole. > > > > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > <SNIP> > > > +static int evict_color(struct drm_mm *mm, > > + struct evict_node *nodes, > > + unsigned int *order, > > + unsigned int count, > > + unsigned int size, > > + unsigned int alignment, > > + unsigned long color, > > + const struct insert_mode *mode) > > expect_evict_color? evict_color gave me an impression of single-way > action (when reading the next patch). I thought of this and evict_something() as being the final level test runner (with the callers iterating over various paramters). expect_insert_fail/expect_insert_in_range_fail definitely are the single action check result matches expectations (return bool). Not convinced these two fall into the same category, so I'll leave as is. -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
