> -----Original Message----- > From: Chris Wilson [mailto:chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2014 7:31 PM > To: Zhang, Xiong Y > Cc: intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [PATCH] igt: Correct the return value for drm > short_buffer read > > On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 10:14:15AM +0000, Zhang, Xiong Y wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Chris Wilson [mailto:chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > > > Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2014 5:53 PM > > > To: Zhang, Xiong Y > > > Cc: intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] igt: Correct the return value for > > > drm short_buffer read > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 03:52:11PM +0800, Xiong Zhang wrote: > > > > After i915 commit: > > > > commit bd008e5b2953186fc0c6633a885ade95e7043800 > > > > Author: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Date: Tue Oct 7 14:13:51 2014 +0100 > > > > > > > > drm: Implement O_NONBLOCK support on /dev/dri/cardN > > > > > > > > the return value for drm short_buffer read is -1 and errno is EAGAIN. > > > > > > No, it is not. > > > -Chris > > Without this patch, system fail in short-buffer-block and > short-buffer-nonblock subtest. > > With this patch, these two subtest could pass. > > That's the point of the test, the kernel behaviour is wrong. There is a patch to fix > the kernel. > -Chris [Zhang, Xiong Y] Oh, I know it. Thanks. So could you send this patch to fix it ? > > -- > Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
