On 2/10/2018 1:00 AM, Chris Wilson wrote:
We run the per-engine scheduling smoketests across all engines, the opposite of what was intended! Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk> --- tests/gem_exec_schedule.c | 12 ++++++++---- 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/tests/gem_exec_schedule.c b/tests/gem_exec_schedule.c index b45ba1670..ec02d9943 100644 --- a/tests/gem_exec_schedule.c +++ b/tests/gem_exec_schedule.c @@ -208,11 +208,15 @@ static void smoketest(int fd, unsigned ring, unsigned timeout) uint32_t *ptr;nengine = 0;- for_each_engine(fd, engine) { - if (ignore_engine(fd, engine)) - continue; + if (ring == -1) { + for_each_engine(fd, engine) { + if (ignore_engine(fd, engine)) + continue;- engines[nengine++] = engine;+ engines[nengine++] = engine; + } + } else { + engines[nengine++] = ring; } igt_require(nengine);
LGTM. However, do we need the random number generation(from 0 to nengine) in the following code if a single engine is selected?
Reviewed-by: vinay.belgaum...@intel.com
_______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
