On 15/10/2012, Daniel Vetter <[email protected]> wrote:
> gem_cs_tlb is harmless, the testcase itself isn't that robust and
> fails an internal self-check once a while when other things have
> happened - it should work if you run it alone. The
> gem_set_tiling_vs_pwrite is more unsettling - does that reliably fail
> with the little backport and reliably work on a kernel without that
> backport? Might be we miss another workaround.
>
> I'll double-check these tests on my own i915g meanwhile.

More test results:
- without any of the patches:
gem_set_tiling_vs_pwrite passes

- with:
  c9c4b6f6c283 drm/i915: fix swizzle detection for gen3
gem_set_tiling_vs_pwrite FAILs

- with:
  7dd490658627 drm/i915: Mark untiled BLT commands as fenced on gen2/3
  (the first patch on that commit + the fix proposed on this thread)
gem_set_tiling_vs_pwrite passes
13 other tests fail

- with:
  same as above
  + 15a13bbdffb0 drm/i915: clear fencing tracking state when retiring requests
gem_set_tiling_vs_pwrite passes
13 other tests fail


Unfortunately, the c9c4b6f6c283 commit (that we can conclude is the
one making gem_set_tiling_vs_pwrite fail), is needed to fix the
corrupted images and text.
You can see the output from the running all tests with the other
patches applied at [1].

Regards,
Luís Picciochi

1 - http://dl.dropbox.com/u/15755099/intel_gpu_tests_2.tar.bz2
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to