On 11/3/2021 06:50, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
On 22/10/2021 00:40, John.C.Harrison@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
From: John Harrison <John.C.Harrison@xxxxxxxxx>
The 'many' test ended with an 'assert(count)', presumably meaning to
ensure that some objects were actually captured. However, 'count' is
the number of objects created not how many were captured. Plus, there
is already a 'require(count > 1)' at the start and count is invarient
so the final assert is basically pointless.
General concensus appears to be that the test should not fail
irrespective of how many blobs are captured as low memory situations
could cause the capture to be abbreviated. So just remove the
pointless assert completely.
Hm the test appears to be using intel_get_avail_ram_mb() to size the
working set. Suggesting problems with low memory situations should not
apply unless bugs. In which case would a better fix be improving the
sizing logic and changing the assert to igt_assert(blobs)?
After fixing the sysfs read code to cope with large files, I don't ever
see abbreviated captures any more. However, other reviewers objected to
asserting anything at all about the final count (whether full size, zero
or whatever) on the grounds that low memory issues *might* still occur.
And some in quite blunt language as I recall. If you think different,
feel free to start your own patch set.
John.
Regards,
Tvrtko
Signed-off-by: John Harrison <John.C.Harrison@xxxxxxxxx>
---
tests/i915/gem_exec_capture.c | 1 -
1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/tests/i915/gem_exec_capture.c
b/tests/i915/gem_exec_capture.c
index 7e0a8b8ad..53649cdb2 100644
--- a/tests/i915/gem_exec_capture.c
+++ b/tests/i915/gem_exec_capture.c
@@ -524,7 +524,6 @@ static void many(int fd, int dir, uint64_t size,
unsigned int flags)
}
igt_info("Captured %lu %"PRId64"-blobs out of a total of %lu\n",
blobs, size >> 12, count);
- igt_assert(count);
free(error);
free(offsets);
