[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] igt: Correct the return value for drm short_buffer read

[Chris Wilson]

On Fri, Dec 26, 2014 at 01:16:06AM +0000, Zhang, Xiong Y wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Chris Wilson [mailto:chris at chris-wilson.co.uk]
> > Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2014 7:31 PM
> > To: Zhang, Xiong Y
> > Cc: intel-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org
> > Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] igt: Correct the return value for drm
> > short_buffer read
> > 
> > On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 10:14:15AM +0000, Zhang, Xiong Y wrote:
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Chris Wilson [mailto:chris at chris-wilson.co.uk]
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2014 5:53 PM
> > > > To: Zhang, Xiong Y
> > > > Cc: intel-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org
> > > > Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] igt: Correct the return value for
> > > > drm short_buffer read
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 03:52:11PM +0800, Xiong Zhang wrote:
> > > > > After i915 commit:
> > > > > commit bd008e5b2953186fc0c6633a885ade95e7043800
> > > > > Author: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
> > > > > Date:   Tue Oct 7 14:13:51 2014 +0100
> > > > >
> > > > >     drm: Implement O_NONBLOCK support on /dev/dri/cardN
> > > > >
> > > > > the return value for drm short_buffer read is -1 and errno is EAGAIN.
> > > >
> > > > No, it is not.
> > > > -Chris
> > > Without this patch, system fail in short-buffer-block and
> > short-buffer-nonblock subtest.
> > > With this patch, these two subtest could pass.
> > 
> > That's the point of the test, the kernel behaviour is wrong. There is a patch to fix
> > the kernel.
> > -Chris
> [Zhang, Xiong Y] Oh, I know it. Thanks.
> So could you send this patch to fix it ?

http://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/38174/

Daniel wanted the igt test first...
-Chris

-- 
Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre