[igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t v5 4/7] tests/meson.build: create testlists for tests

[Mauro Carvalho Chehab]

On Thu, 31 Aug 2023 18:24:05 -0700
Ilja Friedel <ihf at google.com> wrote:

> Hi Mauro,
> 
> On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 2:28 AM Mauro Carvalho Chehab <
> mauro.chehab at linux.intel.com> wrote:  
> 
> > The testlist files are used for two purposes:
> >
> > 1. for documentation build;
> > 2. for CI automation to run the tests.
> >
> > While right now Intel CI doesn't depend on the produced testlists,
> > this may change in the future. So, instead of making the testlist
> > build dependent of testplan, the better seems to verify if the
> > build is not a cross-compilation, e. g. with a patch similar to
> > the enclosed one.
> >  
> 
> In my experience it is better to separate build phases from phases that use
> these binaries and execute them. It makes steps more modular and clearer
> where any failures come from. Having test lists sounds like a good idea
> and beneficial to other architectures.

My original approach was to do that, but I had some issues due to the
lack of some features with the minimal meson version supported by IGT
(and upgrading the version would also break gitlab pipelines).

> > Could you please check if this will address the issue? I don't have
> > a cross-compilation environment handy to test it, so it would be
> > easier if you could test it for me.
> >  
> 
> The enclosed patch "[PATCH i-g-t] tests/meson.build: only generate
> testlists
> on native builds" works for our build system. If you want to stick with it,
> could you please land it in the upstream tree? 

I sent the patch upstream too. Had to do a rebase today due to
a conflict (that actually made the final patch simpler):

	https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/123104/

Could you please re-test and review or ack it? I'll merge it after
getting your R-B or A-B.

> Otherwise I could try a different patch as well.

Sure! If you'd like to spin a different patch addressing it, go
for it.

Regards,
Mauro