On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 05:32:59PM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 04:44:20PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 03:22:23PM +0200, Joonas Lahtinen wrote: > > > Cc: Thomas Wood <thomas.wood@xxxxxxxxx> > > > Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > Cc: Damien Lespiau <damien.lespiau@xxxxxxxxx> > > > Signed-off-by: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Given that we have all that in piglit already the commit message is a bit > > thin on justification. Why do we need this in igt too? How does this > > interact with the piglit dmesg capture? > > It's doesn't interfere with anyone else parsing kmsg/dmesg for > themselves, but it adds very useful functionality to standalone igt. > Which to me is significantly more valuable and I have been patching it > into igt for over a year and wished it was taken more seriously given > the number of incorrect bug reports generated. Ah, the "It doesn't interfere ..." is the crucial part I missed, I didn't know you could read dmesg in parallel without eating message for other consumers. Jonaas, with the above used as commit message (or something similar) this is Acked-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> Cheers, Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
