[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/selftests: Downgrade severity of CS/SRM frequency scaling

[Sundaresan, Sujaritha]

On 7/23/2020 6:07 PM, Chris Wilson wrote:
> Gracefully skip over the failures in the frequency scaling for the
> moment, the results are under review.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
> Cc: "Sundaresan, Sujaritha" <sujaritha.sundaresan at intel.com>
> Cc: "Ewins, Jon" <jon.ewins at intel.com>
> ---
>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/selftest_rps.c | 4 ++--
>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/selftest_rps.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/selftest_rps.c
> index 8624f5d2a1f3..b50ed20c427c 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/selftest_rps.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/selftest_rps.c
> @@ -700,7 +700,7 @@ int live_rps_frequency_cs(void *arg)
>   				f = act; /* may skip ahead [pcu granularity] */
>   			}
>   
> -			err = -EINVAL;
> +			err = -EINTR;
>   		}
>   
>   err_vma:
> @@ -841,7 +841,7 @@ int live_rps_frequency_srm(void *arg)
>   				f = act; /* may skip ahead [pcu granularity] */
>   			}
>   
> -			err = -EINVAL;
> +			err = -EINTR;
>   		}
>   
>   err_vma:

The BAT failure looks to be unrelated.

Hopefully we can get a little more clarity in the future as to why the

CS does not scale once we are sure that there are no HW or PCU issues.

Reviewed-by : Sujaritha Sundaresan <sujaritha.sundaresan at intel.com>