[igt-dev] [PATCH] drm/doc: Make igts for cross-driver stuff mandatory

Daniel Vetter daniel at ffwll.ch
Wed Jan 23 10:54:03 UTC 2019


On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 12:03:40PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Jan 2019, "Wentland, Harry" <Harry.Wentland at amd.com> wrote:
> > Would it make sense to append something like ", if such a test can be
> > reasonably made using IGT for the target HW." to make it clear to
> > contributors that in cases like the one discussed this is at the
> > reviewers discretion?
> 
> I think the simplest change would be to say API changes SHOULD have
> driver-agnostic testcases, with the RFC 2119 meaning of SHOULD:
> 
>    SHOULD   This word, or the adjective "RECOMMENDED", mean that there
>    may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore a
>    particular item, but the full implications must be understood and
>    carefully weighed before choosing a different course.
> 
> I.e. s/need/should/. I think it also catches the spirit of the
> discussion here; seems like everyone agrees having tests is a good goal.
> 
> You'll have to allow for reviewer/maintainer/community discretion no
> matter what. Judging by the discussion, CRC based tests don't currently
> meet the driver-agnostic requirement. Playing devil's advocate, you
> could argue any new APIs couldn't be tested with CRC either, even if it
> were the most reasonable approach for i915.

I think I'll combine both for v3, I wanted to do something like that
anyway to address Eric Anholt's similar concern.
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch


More information about the igt-dev mailing list