On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 10:53:16AM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 11:33:06AM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote: > > If we do not have lowlevel support for reseting the GPU, or if the user > > has explicitly disabled reseting the device, the failure is expected. > > Since it is an expected failure, we should be using a lower priority > > message than *ERROR*, perhaps NOTICE. In the absence of DRM_NOTICE, just > > emit the expected failure as a DEBUG message. > > > > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> > > Reviewed-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> > > lgtm. Are there now changes to gem_eio needed to adjust/improve test > coverage still? I lost a bit track on this part ... The only remaining task for gem_eio (aside from adding more negative tests) is to cement that wait-ioctl doesn't return EIO if it is wedged previously or if a hang occurs during the wait. -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
