Here is a cheap way for this test to give consistent results. This
doesn't change the usefulness of this test, hopefully.
Signed-off-by: Damien Lespiau <damien.lesp...@intel.com>
---
tests/gem_bad_reloc.c | 8 +++++++-
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/tests/gem_bad_reloc.c b/tests/gem_bad_reloc.c
index df0100f..ef6b52a 100644
--- a/tests/gem_bad_reloc.c
+++ b/tests/gem_bad_reloc.c
@@ -87,7 +87,13 @@ static int negative_reloc(int fd, unsigned flags)
gem_close(fd, gem_exec[1].handle);
igt_info("Found offset %ld for 4k batch\n", (long)gem_exec[0].offset);
- igt_require(gem_exec[0].offset < BIAS);
+ /*
+ * Ideally we'd like to be able to control where the kernel is going to
+ * place the buffer. We don't SKIP here because it causes the test
+ * to "randomly" flip-flop between the SKIP and PASS states.
+ */
+ if (gem_exec[0].offset < BIAS)
+ return 0;
memset(gem_reloc, 0, sizeof(gem_reloc));
for (i = 0; i < sizeof(gem_reloc)/sizeof(gem_reloc[0]); i++) {
--
1.8.3.1
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
