On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 07:00:18PM +0300, Imre Deak wrote:
> On pe, 2016-05-20 at 18:20 +0300, Marius Vlad wrote:
> > Either we return $IGT_EXIT_FAILURE or remove it entirely (like in
> > this
> > patch). If rmmod returns non-zero (i.e., Module: i915 is still in
> > use), reload
> > will bail with $IGT_EXIT_SKIP, making the check with lsmod useless.
> > Also use the return value in the fault-injection loop.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Marius Vlad <marius.c.vlad@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > tests/drv_module_reload_basic | 4 ++--
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/tests/drv_module_reload_basic
> > b/tests/drv_module_reload_basic
> > index 3bba796..3a8df33 100755
> > --- a/tests/drv_module_reload_basic
> > +++ b/tests/drv_module_reload_basic
> > @@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ function reload() {
> >
> > #ignore errors in ips - gen5 only
> > rmmod intel_ips &> /dev/null
> > - rmmod i915 || return $IGT_EXIT_SKIP
> > + rmmod i915
>
> Not sure what was the reason to bail out here, continuing seems like
> the correct thing to do.
If we can't unload, we can perform the modprobe testing. The system is
not in a state suitable for testing so skip or fail. If we are certain
that the rmmod failure is a bug, fail, if it merely something like the
system doesn't support module unloading, skip.
Continuing on after failure to unload is not a good idea.
-Chris
--
Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
