On 09/18/2015 03:22 AM, Thomas Wood wrote: > It's helpful to include "i-g-t" in the subject line for > intel-gpu-tools patches so that they are easily identified. This can > be done by using the --subject-prefix "PATCH i-g-t" option when using > git format-patch or send-email and can also be set as a local > configuration option using the following command: git config > format.subjectprefix "PATCH i-g-t" Yeah you mentioned this before and I forgot, sorry. I'll add git configs to my igt repos so make it happen automatically. > On 17 September 2015 at 17:41, Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> This subtest is trying to set the no-zeromap flag on the context without >> root privs. Rather than expecting an EPERM on what's presumably a >> nonzero value, we should expect success on a set call w/o root privs. >> This looks like a copy & paste error from when the subtest was added, >> since setting the ban period has different expected behavior. > > There is already a patch for this: http://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/58991/ > > I was waiting for confirmation on the expected behaviour, but also > testing both root and non-root for success seems a bit redundant. > Perhaps removing the root-set test would be worthwhile. Yeah that would be ok too. FWIW the other patch has my r-b too, though I haven't heard back from David. Do you want to commit Daniele's patch or should I just push mine? Thanks, Jesse _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
