[Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t] lib: Assert when gem is dead in igt_require_gem

[Daniel Vetter]

On Fri, Sep 08, 2017 at 09:10:54AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> Quoting Daniel Vetter (2017-09-08 07:38:24)
> > The function is perhaps a bit renamed, but if a previous tests failed
> > so badly it left the gpu wrecked, then we should fail, not skip.
> > 
> > Testcases shouldn't ever randomly skip at least, since that just
> > indicates whether the feature is there or not. Pass/fail is for
> > whether it's working or not.
> 
> Not quite, now you are randomly failing a test even before it is testing
> anything. Should we fail every test just because we can't open an fd?

Well I guess the smart choice would be to fail on -EIO and skip on
-ENODEV, but given that we have a lack of hw that returns -ENODEV I'm not
sure we should bake that in. We do have gt without display, not (yet,
maybe it'll happen) display without GT. gma500 would be such a thing, but
that one got its own driver.

I'll respin.
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch