[PATCH i-g-t v2 5/5] tests/intel/xe_fault_injection: Do not assert if the captured error is not same as injected error.

[K V P, Satyanarayana]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dugast, Francois <francois.dugast at intel.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 5, 2025 5:23 PM
> To: K V P, Satyanarayana <satyanarayana.k.v.p at intel.com>
> Cc: igt-dev at lists.freedesktop.org; Wajdeczko, Michal
> <Michal.Wajdeczko at intel.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH i-g-t v2 5/5] tests/intel/xe_fault_injection: Do not assert if
> the captured error is not same as injected error.
> 
> On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 01:04:45PM +0530, Satyanarayana K V P wrote:
> > In the current implementation, test asserts if the captured error is not same
> as
> > injected error. It is a possible that the error received is translated to other
> > error which can be returned to application.
> >
> > Try to unbind the device at the end of inject_fault_probe() as this can be
> > executed in a loop if IGT_FAULT_INJECT_ITERATION environment variable is
> set.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Satyanarayana K V P <satyanarayana.k.v.p at intel.com>
> > Cc: Michał Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko at intel.com>
> > Cc: Francois Dugast <francois.dugast at intel.com>
> > ---
> >  tests/intel/xe_fault_injection.c | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/tests/intel/xe_fault_injection.c b/tests/intel/xe_fault_injection.c
> > index cf0337733..82e338965 100644
> > --- a/tests/intel/xe_fault_injection.c
> > +++ b/tests/intel/xe_fault_injection.c
> > @@ -227,8 +227,8 @@ inject_fault_probe(int fd, char pci_slot[], const char
> function_name[])
> >  	injection_list_do(INJECTION_LIST_ADD, function_name);
> >  	set_retval(function_name, INJECT_ERRNO);
> >  	xe_sysfs_driver_do(fd, pci_slot, XE_SYSFS_DRIVER_TRY_BIND);
> > -	igt_assert_eq(-errno, INJECT_ERRNO);
> >  	injection_list_do(INJECTION_LIST_REMOVE, function_name);
> > +	xe_sysfs_driver_do(fd, pci_slot, XE_SYSFS_DRIVER_TRY_UNBIND);
> 
> Those should be 2 separate patches.
> 
> 1. Try driver unbind after fault injection during probe
> 2. Accept returned error different than injected one
> 
> I am fine with 1. as it is, just the one line.
> 
> However removing the assert in 2. is not acceptable. This assert *IS*
> the real test performed for existing fault injection tests. If we
> remove it then we will not be able to detect when probing does not
> behave as expected in case of failure.
> 
> We need a more flexible solution to your problem, such as adding one
> parameter to inject_fault_probe() with the expected returned error
> code.
> 
> Francois
> 
Updated patch with review comments.
-Satya.
> >  }
> >
> >  /**
> > --
> > 2.35.3
> >