Re: [PATCH] drm/i915/selftests: Return to kernel context after each test

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Quoting Mika Kuoppala (2018-05-08 13:57:23)
> Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> 
> > Quoting Chris Wilson (2018-05-08 13:38:09)
> >> Quoting Mika Kuoppala (2018-05-08 13:34:49)
> >> > Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> >> > 
> >> > > As we flush each test and wait for idle before the next, also switch
> >> > > back to the kernel context. This helps limit the amount of collateral
> >> > > damage a test may cause by resetting to the default state each time (and
> >> > > also helps clean up temporaries used by the test).
> >> > >
> >> > > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> > > Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> > > ---
> >> > >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/selftests/igt_flush_test.c | 5 +++++
> >> > >  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
> >> > >
> >> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/selftests/igt_flush_test.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/selftests/igt_flush_test.c
> >> > > index abff2f04ea84..7f35bddc2e95 100644
> >> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/selftests/igt_flush_test.c
> >> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/selftests/igt_flush_test.c
> >> > > @@ -57,6 +57,11 @@ int igt_flush_test(struct drm_i915_private *i915, unsigned int flags)
> >> > >  
> >> > >       cond_resched();
> >> > >  
> >> > > +     if (i915_gem_switch_to_kernel_context(i915)) {
> >> > > +             pr_err("Failed to switch back to kernel context; declaring wedged\n");
> >> > > +             i915_gem_set_wedged(i915);
> >> > 
> >> > You don't want to give the error code? It comes from request_alloc.
> >> 
> >> We are setting wedged, so we end up with returning -EIO.
> >> 
> >> > Also if the test already wedged itself we would wedge again.
> >> 
> >> Trickier. But at that moment, doubling up on the error messages isn't
> >> the worst thing after hitting a terminal error.
> >
> > It's the kind of distraction one tackles after hitting the terminal
> > error so that you can ignore the underlying problem for a bit while you
> > think ;)
> 
> Yeah it the test manages to wedge we would get EIO so nothing
> to see there.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Applied, thanks for the review. If we ever feel upset about the double
message in practice, then is the time to fix it ;)
-Chris
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx




[Index of Archives]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux