Quoting Chris Wilson (2019-11-15 13:22:04) > Quoting Imre Deak (2019-11-15 13:15:30) > > On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 03:11:43PM +0200, Imre Deak wrote: > > > On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 12:23:43PM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote: > > > > When telling the user that device power management is disabled, it is > > > > helpful to say which device that was. At the same time, while it is a > > > > mere inconvenience to the user, it is devastating to CI as this and > > > > future tests may fail out of the blue. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Cc: Imre Deak <imre.deak@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Imre Deak <imre.deak@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > Although we would need a way to test recovery - which we a have a > > testcase for - so tainting for that case is not ok. > > You put that test at the end of the queue. Fwiw, we don't seem to see > the corrupt state across a module reload; either that or I am blind. I guess you would prefer a debugfs... -Chris _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
