[Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t] i915/gem_eio: Not everyone actually has contexts

[Chris Wilson]

Quoting Antonio Argenziano (2019-02-21 17:50:12)
> 
> 
> On 21/02/19 02:01, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > Eek, I assumed the 'banned' subtest only applied to context platforms,
> > ti doesn't. The basic test works for all, checking whether a second
>     ^--- Typo? :).
> > context works after the first is banned however only applies to
> > platforms with contexts!
> > 
> 
> Yeah, I missed that.
> 
> > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
> > ---
> >   tests/i915/gem_eio.c | 12 ++++++------
> >   1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/tests/i915/gem_eio.c b/tests/i915/gem_eio.c
> > index c5fd07585..3f941071d 100644
> > --- a/tests/i915/gem_eio.c
> > +++ b/tests/i915/gem_eio.c
> > @@ -334,13 +334,13 @@ static void __test_banned(int fd)
> >   
> >                       /* Only this context, not the file, should be banned */
> >                       igt_assert_neq(__gem_context_create(fd, &ctx), -EIO);
> > -                     igt_assert_neq(ctx, 0);
> 
> Although this assert seems to suggest it didn't apply to context-less 
> platforms as it would fail here.

We pass the first with -ENODEV, and fail the second, so yup.

> I think it still makes sense to test you get banned on context 0 so,

Aye, we still want to ban individual fd using default context. Hmm, we
should also go around the loop again to verify that the second context
is also banned. Tomorrow!
-Chris