Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-03-22 12:36:58) > > On 22/03/2018 11:39, Chris Wilson wrote: > > Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-03-22 11:17:11) > > > >> trigger_reset(fd); > >> + > >> + /* HACK for CI */ > >> + igt_assert(igt_nsec_elapsed(&ts) < 5e9); > > > > igt_seconds_elapsed() the approximation is worth the readability. > > > > In this case you might like to try igt_set_timeout(), as I think each > > subtest and exithandlers are in place to make them robust against > > premature failures. > > Well this was just to see that will happen on the shards here. As > mentioned in the commit I get that yet unexplained GPU hang at subtest > exit here. So the assert above is just to notice if the same happens on > shards. And I was thinking it was a reasonable enhancement :) Probably more so for igt/gem_wait itself to ask that if we reset the request we are waiting upon it completes in a timely manner. (We don't care about wedged handling there, just reset handling.) -Chris _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
