On 06/06/18 10:42, Chris Wilson wrote:
The current method of checking for a failed module load is flawed, as we
only report the error on probing it is not being reported back by
modprobe. So we have to dig inside the module_parameters while the
module is still loaded to discover the error.
v2: Expect i915.inject_load_failure to be zero on success
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Michał Winiarski <michal.winiarski@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Imre Deak <imre.deak@xxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Michał Winiarski <michal.winiarski@xxxxxxxxx>
---
tests/drv_module_reload.c | 45 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
1 file changed, 40 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tests/drv_module_reload.c b/tests/drv_module_reload.c
index 092982960..e18aaea5e 100644
--- a/tests/drv_module_reload.c
+++ b/tests/drv_module_reload.c
@@ -234,6 +234,38 @@ reload(const char *opts_i915)
return err;
}
static void
gem_sanitycheck(void)
{
@@ -323,12 +355,15 @@ igt_main
igt_assert_eq(reload("disable_display=1"), 0);
igt_subtest("basic-reload-inject") {
- char buf[64];
int i = 0;
- do {
- snprintf(buf, sizeof(buf),
- "inject_load_failure=%d", ++i);
- } while (reload(buf));
+
+ igt_i915_driver_unload();
+
+ while (inject_fault("i915", "inject_load_failure", ++i) == 0)
+ ;
+
+ /* We expect to hit at least one fault! */
+ igt_assert(i > 1);
I think Michal's patch adds the number of available checkpoints in a
debugfs, should we trust the driver and assert on: amount of checkpoints
hit != available checkpoints? Or maybe just spew out a warning.
Thanks,
Antonio
}
igt_fixture {
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
