On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 03:11:57PM +0200, David Weinehall wrote:
> On machines that lack an LLC the pm-caching subtest will
> terminate with sigbus and thus CRASH during the
> I915_CACHING_CACHED iteration. This patch adds a check for
> this condition and skips that iteration.
you can delete the got_caching assertion and
enable_one_screen_and_wait() as well, they are not exercising the
associated code.
>
> Signed-off-by: David Weinehall <david.weinehall@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> tests/pm_rpm.c | 10 ++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/tests/pm_rpm.c b/tests/pm_rpm.c
> index 2aa6c1018aa2..c25252eafad0 100644
> --- a/tests/pm_rpm.c
> +++ b/tests/pm_rpm.c
> @@ -1813,6 +1813,16 @@ static void pm_test_caching(void)
> gem_buf = gem_mmap__gtt(drm_fd, handle, gtt_obj_max_size, PROT_WRITE);
>
> for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(cache_levels); i++) {
> + /*
> + * Skip the I915_CACHING_CACHED test
> + * if we lack an LLC cache
> + */
> + if (cache_levels[i] == I915_CACHING_CACHED &&
> + !gem_has_llc(drm_fd)) {
> + igt_debug("!gem_has_llc(); skipping\n");
> + continue;
> + }
No. For the purposes of the test you actually want to call
gem_set_caching(fd, handle, NONE).
-Chris
--
Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
