<html>
<head>
<base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/">
</head>
<body>
<p>
<div>
<b><a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_REOPENED "
title="REOPENED - Test enumeration becomes funky on some tests due to fd FILE* stream change"
href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=108891#c5">Comment # 5</a>
on <a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_REOPENED "
title="REOPENED - Test enumeration becomes funky on some tests due to fd FILE* stream change"
href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=108891">bug 108891</a>
from <span class="vcard"><a class="email" href="mailto:casey.g.bowman@intel.com" title="Casey Bowman <casey.g.bowman@intel.com>"> <span class="fn">Casey Bowman</span></a>
</span></b>
<pre>(In reply to Chris Wilson from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=108891#c4">comment #4</a>)
<span class="quote">> Just a very misleading bisect.</span >
Agreed, the commit found would probably just cause the gem -hang tests to fail
in the kernel we're using as you mentioned earlier.
However, for the cases in which a basic subtest is run (for example,
igt@gem_busy@basic-busy-default or igt@gem_exec_reloc@basic-cpu) there
shouldn't be any hang checks (igt_allow_hang) for the requirements of those
subtests, right?
If so, should we change the bug title to reflect that some requirement checks
are being run on subtests that don't reflect the subtest names, like how
igt@gem_busy@basic-busy-default doesn't have 'hang' in it?</pre>
</div>
</p>
<hr>
<span>You are receiving this mail because:</span>
<ul>
<li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li>
</ul>
</body>
</html>