[Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t] lib/igt_core.c: Expand --run-subtest functionality.

Daniel Vetter daniel at ffwll.ch
Wed Jan 27 09:58:43 PST 2016

On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 04:45:57PM +0000, Morton, Derek J wrote:
> >
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Daniel Vetter [mailto:daniel.vetter at ffwll.ch] On Behalf Of Daniel Vetter
> >Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2016 3:43 PM
> >To: Morton, Derek J
> >Cc: Daniel Vetter; Ville Syrjälä; intel-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org
> >Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t] lib/igt_core.c: Expand --run-subtest functionality.
> >- igts falling over when the kernel doesn't support a feature. This
> >  shouldn't ever happen, igt testcases are suppose to skip when the
> >  requirements aren't met. Please report any such cases so that we can fix
> >  them up in upstream igt.
> I do not think everything is fixable upstream.
> We have had cases where there is an ioctl missing on android (or worse
> does something different, though that gets fixed eventually), or where
> an ioctl has been extended. If the ioctl fails the test fails.

All tests should make sure they can handle missing ioctl. There's indeed
some trouble when android extends the interface in incompatible ways
compared to upstream. The solution to that would be to start adding
android ioctls at the very end of the range (same with flags and
everything else really).

Or you need a bunch of patches on top of upstream igt to adjust testcases
to the Android abi. But I guess the problem with that is that Android
still uses its own testsuites for both GT and display, and until that's
unified it'll be just painful. And I think that pain should be beared by
vpg, not upstream, since it's just part of the price to be paid for
essentially forking/diverging.
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation

More information about the Intel-gfx mailing list