Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] drm/drm_vblank: Change EINVAL by the correct errno
To:     Rodrigo Siqueira <rodrigosiqueiramelo@gmail.com>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
Cc:     Gustavo Padovan <gustavo@padovan.org>, Sean Paul <sean@poorly.run>,
        Dave Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>,
        dri-devel <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org
References: <20181015170529.dgzpbm37hbuvqatc@smtp.gmail.com>
 <20181016123541.GW31561@phenom.ffwll.local>
 <20181017124315.khhlykapxnug6ej6@smtp.gmail.com>
 <CAKMK7uF0ucof6gwAiY1SSp5oHt3BZ18Jkui5ugvkZc4u-NOJoA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20190113202323.co7upmn5fg32b7gn@smtp.gmail.com>
From:   Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
Message-ID: <f4e3966d-bdc5-2816-2e4d-1b9046757b0f@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Mon, 14 Jan 2019 10:51:07 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20190113202323.co7upmn5fg32b7gn@smtp.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Op 13-01-2019 om 21:23 schreef Rodrigo Siqueira:
> Hi,
>
> I resend this patch for CI via “intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org” as
> Daniel suggested, and I got a feedback that reported an issue as can be
> seen here:
>
>    https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/51147/
>
> After a careful analysis of what happened, I concluded that the problem
> is related to the function “igt_wait_for_vblank_count()” in “igt_kms.c”.
> This function has the following assert:
>
>    igt_assert(drmWaitVBlank(drm_fd, &wait_vbl) == 0)
>
> This function only checks if everything went well with the
> drmWaitVBlank() operation and does not make any other validation. IMHO
> the patch is correct, and the problem pointed out by CI is not related
> to this change.

Hey,

Thanks for finding the root cause. Before upstreaming can you send a fix for i-g-t so we don't lose CI coverage after changing the behavior?

~Maarten