Quoting Ville Syrjälä (2018-07-09 14:19:40)
> On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 11:28:47AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > gem_render_copy requires a working GPU so check first.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > tests/gem_render_copy.c | 1 +
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/tests/gem_render_copy.c b/tests/gem_render_copy.c
> > index 8373cd738..238e70e97 100644
> > --- a/tests/gem_render_copy.c
> > +++ b/tests/gem_render_copy.c
> > @@ -529,6 +529,7 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
> > igt_fixture {
> > data.drm_fd = drm_open_driver_render(DRIVER_INTEL);
> > data.devid = intel_get_drm_devid(data.drm_fd);
> > + igt_require_gem(data.drm_fd);
>
> Is there ever a case where we'd be happy with open_driver() failing?
> Just wondering about putting the require into the function itself.
I suppose we could add require_gem to open_driver_render(), but it
doesn't seem that generic. We definitely can do KMS operations even if
execbuf() returns -EIO.
At some point, we'll just have to bite the bullet and start rewriting
GEM tests to apply to amdgpu as well -- there are quite a few that I
think aren't i915 centric, e.g. gem_sync, that might help define what we
can and what we can't generalise.
-Chris
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
