On Mon, Jul 07, 2014 at 11:18:49PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 04, 2014 at 12:01:24PM +0100, Damien Lespiau wrote:
> > Doing otherwise breaks listing the subtests. The test was throwing an
> > error out when universal planes were disabled as well because of that.
> > 
> > Cc: Matt Roper <matthew.d.ro...@intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Damien Lespiau <damien.lesp...@intel.com>
> > ---
> >  tests/kms_universal_plane.c | 3 +--
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/tests/kms_universal_plane.c b/tests/kms_universal_plane.c
> > index fe0fde3..c64cdbb 100644
> > --- a/tests/kms_universal_plane.c
> > +++ b/tests/kms_universal_plane.c
> > @@ -133,6 +133,7 @@ functional_test_pipe(data_t *data, enum pipe pipe, 
> > igt_output_t *output)
> >     int num_primary = 0, num_cursor = 0;
> >     int i;
> >  
> > +   igt_assert(data->display.has_universal_planes);
> 
> Shouldn't this be an igt_require instead? In any case moving this into
> subtests is correct.

There's already a igt_require in the fixture block, I guess Matt wanted
to be extra extra sure. Could have removed it as well.

-- 
Damien
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Reply via email to