On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 01:00:26PM +0900, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> On 17.03.2016 16:36, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 06:41:14AM +1000, Dave Airlie wrote:
> >> Just an aside,
> >>
> >> So is there no way to do hibernate with these blocks?
> >>
> >> Like can you not cleanly shut them down without doing a power cycle.
> >>
> >> I have to say UVD is a real pain in the ass from a stability pov, I'd
> >> kinda wished I'd enforced AMD creating something like intel-gpu-tools
> >> and having tests to make sure GPU reset etc stayed working before
> >> merging it.
> > 
> > igt already supports running on any kind of drm device, and it has a bunch
> > of vc4 specific testcases on top. If anyone finds offence in the "intel"
> > part, we can rename it to igt gpu tools/tests ;-)
> 
> Any tips for running the tests on non-Intel GPUs? I tried piglit igt.py,
> but it was generating tens of thousands of failures from tests which
> look Intel specific.

Yeah Chris again broke the SKIP logic in gem_concurrent_blt/all testcases.
Just explicitly exclude those with -x gem_concurrent. The problem is that
hw/kernel feature checks aren't properlty encapsulated in the right
igt_fixture or igt_subtest blocks, so it falls over. Specifically the
access_mode->require() test is only protetected by
igt_only_list_subtests(), which is the wrong way to do it.

Adding Chris.
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch

Reply via email to