[igt-dev] Mandatory Test Suite for KMS Drivers?

[Daniel Stone]

Hi,

On Thu, 3 Mar 2022 at 10:53, Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi at intel.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 03, 2022 at 10:05:07AM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> > Back at XDC we floated the idea of creating a test suite for IGT that we
> > expect any KMS driver to pass, similar to what v4l2-compliance and
> > cec-compliance provide for v4l2 and CEC respectively.
> >
> > I was looking at the list of tests, and it's fairly massive, so it's not
> > clear to me what tests we could start this suite with. I can only assume
> > all the KMS (but the chamelium ones) and fbdev related ones would be a
> > good start?
> >
> > What do you think?
>
> I believe we should start with the group of the tests that we know that
> are reliably passing today on most of the platforms and then increase
> the list as the tests and drivers become more reliable.
>
> For instance, many of these would be candidate to be filtered out for now
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-next/index.html?testfilter=kms
>
> compared to the whole view of kms tests:
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-next/shards-all.html?testfilter=kms

We are running some of IGT on Panfrost + amdgpu + i915 as part of
KernelCI as well: go to https://linux.kernelci.org/test/ and search
for 'igt-gpu'. This gets run for mainline, next, and whatever other
kernel trees push into i915.

There is a Grafana-based dashboard that the KernelCI team have been
working on to visualise test runs, but it's currently having some
backend issues so I can't show you a link for that. I did raise a
suggestion in their design discussion for a proper testing dashboard
for making it easier to see the status, so feel free to pile in there:
https://github.com/kernelci/kernelci-project/discussions/28#discussioncomment-2293696

Cheers,
Daniel