[Bug 70749] New: [SNB/IVB Bisected]igt/gem_ctx_bad_exec/vebox skip

[bugzilla-daemon at freedesktop.org]

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=70749

          Priority: medium
            Bug ID: 70749
                CC: intel-gfx-bugs at lists.freedesktop.org
          Assignee: ben at bwidawsk.net
           Summary: [SNB/IVB Bisected]igt/gem_ctx_bad_exec/vebox skip
        QA Contact: intel-gfx-bugs at lists.freedesktop.org
          Severity: normal
    Classification: Unclassified
                OS: Linux (All)
          Reporter: huax.lu at intel.com
          Hardware: All
            Status: NEW
           Version: unspecified
         Component: DRM/Intel
           Product: DRI

Created attachment 87967
  --> https://bugs.freedesktop.org/attachment.cgi?id=87967&action=edit
dmesg

System Environment:
--------------------------
Platform:  SNB/IVB
Kernel:    (drm-intel-nightly)d1b2b826f0969182f055d11c991f90fdc6a4924a

Bug detailed description:
---------------------------
It skip on sandybridge and ivybridge with -queued,-fixes and -nightly kernel.

Bisect shows: a12d4a713544ff1ff89ca176d7e94e16944adb56 is the first bad commit.
commit a12d4a713544ff1ff89ca176d7e94e16944adb56
Author:     Ben Widawsky <benjamin.widawsky at intel.com>
AuthorDate: Wed Oct 16 22:01:34 2013 -0700
Commit:     Ben Widawsky <benjamin.widawsky at intel.com>
CommitDate: Wed Oct 16 22:01:34 2013 -0700

    gem_ctx_bad_exec: skip vebox when appropriate

    Signed-off-by: Ben Widawsky <ben at bwidawsk.net>

output:
Test requirement not met in function main, file gem_ctx_bad_exec.c:109:
Test requirement: (!(gem_has_vebox(fd)))
Subtest vebox: SKIP

"gem_ctx_bad_exec: skip vebox when appropriate", I am not sure this skip is
expected.

Reproduce steps:
----------------------------
1. ./gem_ctx_bad_exec --run-subtest vebo

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
You are on the CC list for the bug.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx-bugs/attachments/20131022/8b6aa069/attachment.html>