[i-g-t] Revert "tests/gem_ctx_param_basic: fix invalid params"
diff mbox

Message ID 1438896780-25788-1-git-send-email-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch
State New
Headers show

Commit Message

Daniel Vetter Aug. 6, 2015, 9:33 p.m. UTC
This reverts commit 0b45b0746f45deea11670a8b2c949776bbbef55c.

The point of testing for LAST_FLAG + 1 is to catch abi extensions -
despite our best efforts we really suck at properly reviewing for test
coverage when extending ABI.

The real bug here is that David Weinhall hasn't submitted updated igts
for the NO_ZEROMAP feature yet. Imo the right course of action is to
revert that feature if the testcase don't show up within a few days.

Cc: David Weinehall <david.weinehall@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>
---
 tests/gem_ctx_param_basic.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

Comments

Paulo Zanoni Aug. 7, 2015, 1:04 p.m. UTC | #1
2015-08-06 18:33 GMT-03:00 Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>:
> This reverts commit 0b45b0746f45deea11670a8b2c949776bbbef55c.
>
> The point of testing for LAST_FLAG + 1 is to catch abi extensions -
> despite our best efforts we really suck at properly reviewing for test
> coverage when extending ABI.
>
> The real bug here is that David Weinhall hasn't submitted updated igts
> for the NO_ZEROMAP feature yet. Imo the right course of action is to
> revert that feature if the testcase don't show up within a few days.
>
> Cc: David Weinehall <david.weinehall@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>
> ---
>  tests/gem_ctx_param_basic.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/tests/gem_ctx_param_basic.c b/tests/gem_ctx_param_basic.c
> index 5ff3b13f4c7a..b44b37cf0538 100644
> --- a/tests/gem_ctx_param_basic.c
> +++ b/tests/gem_ctx_param_basic.c
> @@ -98,7 +98,7 @@ igt_main
>                 ctx_param.size = 0;
>         }
>
> -       ctx_param.param  = -1;
> +       ctx_param.param  = LOCAL_CONTEXT_PARAM_BAN_PERIOD + 1;

How about adding a comment somewhere "If this breaks it's because we
extended the number of params without updating IGT. Please add the
proper tests for the new param"? That will help preventing us from
making the same error again next year.

>
>         igt_subtest("invalid-param-get") {
>                 ctx_param.context = ctx;
> --
> 2.5.0
>
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
David Weinehall Aug. 10, 2015, 8:31 a.m. UTC | #2
On Fri, Aug 07, 2015 at 10:04:47AM -0300, Paulo Zanoni wrote:
> 2015-08-06 18:33 GMT-03:00 Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>:
> > This reverts commit 0b45b0746f45deea11670a8b2c949776bbbef55c.
> >
> > The point of testing for LAST_FLAG + 1 is to catch abi extensions -
> > despite our best efforts we really suck at properly reviewing for test
> > coverage when extending ABI.
> >
> > The real bug here is that David Weinhall hasn't submitted updated igts
> > for the NO_ZEROMAP feature yet. Imo the right course of action is to
> > revert that feature if the testcase don't show up within a few days.
> >
> > Cc: David Weinehall <david.weinehall@linux.intel.com>
> > Cc: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>
> > ---
> >  tests/gem_ctx_param_basic.c | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/tests/gem_ctx_param_basic.c b/tests/gem_ctx_param_basic.c
> > index 5ff3b13f4c7a..b44b37cf0538 100644
> > --- a/tests/gem_ctx_param_basic.c
> > +++ b/tests/gem_ctx_param_basic.c
> > @@ -98,7 +98,7 @@ igt_main
> >                 ctx_param.size = 0;
> >         }
> >
> > -       ctx_param.param  = -1;
> > +       ctx_param.param  = LOCAL_CONTEXT_PARAM_BAN_PERIOD + 1;
> 
> How about adding a comment somewhere "If this breaks it's because we
> extended the number of params without updating IGT. Please add the
> proper tests for the new param"? That will help preventing us from
> making the same error again next year.

Good idea!


Kind regards, David

Patch
diff mbox

diff --git a/tests/gem_ctx_param_basic.c b/tests/gem_ctx_param_basic.c
index 5ff3b13f4c7a..b44b37cf0538 100644
--- a/tests/gem_ctx_param_basic.c
+++ b/tests/gem_ctx_param_basic.c
@@ -98,7 +98,7 @@  igt_main
 		ctx_param.size = 0;
 	}
 
-	ctx_param.param  = -1;
+	ctx_param.param  = LOCAL_CONTEXT_PARAM_BAN_PERIOD + 1;
 
 	igt_subtest("invalid-param-get") {
 		ctx_param.context = ctx;