On 2/10/2018 1:00 AM, Chris Wilson wrote:
We run the per-engine scheduling smoketests across all engines, the
opposite of what was intended!
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
tests/gem_exec_schedule.c | 12 ++++++++----
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tests/gem_exec_schedule.c b/tests/gem_exec_schedule.c
index b45ba1670..ec02d9943 100644
--- a/tests/gem_exec_schedule.c
+++ b/tests/gem_exec_schedule.c
@@ -208,11 +208,15 @@ static void smoketest(int fd, unsigned ring, unsigned timeout)
uint32_t *ptr;
nengine = 0;
- for_each_engine(fd, engine) {
- if (ignore_engine(fd, engine))
- continue;
+ if (ring == -1) {
+ for_each_engine(fd, engine) {
+ if (ignore_engine(fd, engine))
+ continue;
- engines[nengine++] = engine;
+ engines[nengine++] = engine;
+ }
+ } else {
+ engines[nengine++] = ring;
}
igt_require(nengine);
LGTM. However, do we need the random number generation(from 0 to
nengine) in the following code if a single engine is selected?
Reviewed-by: vinay.belgaumkar@xxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
