Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Th heavy variant of gem_ctx_switch does little more than provide an > alternate timing for the basic gem_ctx_switch; the timing only effects > the HW and does not stress the driver any differently. As such, > including gem_ctx_switch/heavy provides no more basic coverage for BAT > over and above the default gem_ctx_switch and > i915_selftests/live_contexts. > > It takes around 45s, of a 600s total target time for BAT. I looked back drm-tip results and also did bugzilla searches. drm-tip is all green for recent past and those 2 bugzilla entries this test was in any way mentioned, are issues where this test didn't play any particular role itself. Heavy seems to indicate only bigger contexts for switching so I agree with the timing argument. These seconds are more well spent elsewhere. Reviewed-by: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > tests/intel-ci/fast-feedback.testlist | 1 - > 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/tests/intel-ci/fast-feedback.testlist b/tests/intel-ci/fast-feedback.testlist > index 6d42792c6..da3c4c8ed 100644 > --- a/tests/intel-ci/fast-feedback.testlist > +++ b/tests/intel-ci/fast-feedback.testlist > @@ -16,7 +16,6 @@ igt@gem_ctx_exec@basic > igt@gem_ctx_param@basic > igt@gem_ctx_param@basic-default > igt@gem_ctx_switch@basic-default > -igt@gem_ctx_switch@basic-default-heavy > igt@gem_exec_basic@basic-blt > igt@gem_exec_basic@basic-bsd > igt@gem_exec_basic@basic-bsd1 > -- > 2.20.1 _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
