[igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t] tests/kms_render: Rewrite test to take advantage of igt_display.

[Imre Deak]

On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 09:01:14AM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 12:22:07PM +0100, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
> > Op 24-01-18 om 12:08 schreef Chris Wilson:
> > > Quoting Maarten Lankhorst (2018-01-24 10:25:00)
> > >> This test was taking ~100s for each subtest, and both tests were the same,
> > >> but required the user to pay attention. I've changed it to automated
> > >> checking with CRC, and removed the subtests.
> > > What do we do here that isn't covered by kms_frontbuffer*? My guess
> > > would be do simple testing of more configurations (as opposed to
> > > kms_frontbuffer that does lots of different drawing to the same
> > > configuration).
> > Hm probably right. I wouldn't mind removing it too, to be honest..
> 
> Originally added by Imre and reviewed by Rodrigo, but no mention why we
> need this testcase:
> 
> commit 528b1f381c4e67c2e63e23b5597070fffe8033d6
> Author: Imre Deak <imre.deak at intel.com>
> Date:   Thu May 30 22:59:59 2013 +0300
> 
>     tests: add kms_render
>     
>     Add a test going through all connectors/crtcs/modes/formats painting to
>     a front FB with CPU or painting to a back FB with CPU and blitting it
>     to the front FB.
>     
>     Only formats understood by cairo are supported for now.
>     
>     Signed-off-by: Imre Deak <imre.deak at intel.com>
>     Reviewed-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi at gmail.com>
> 
> I'm voting for removal too, assuming Imre doesn't come up with a very good
> reason for why we need it.

Looking at IRC logs, it was added to test FBC with different
formats/outputs as FBC has different requirements based on these. But
yes it was all manual. No objection to remove it if there is an other
test doing front buffer rendering.

--Imre