[Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t 1/5] tests: Use bash for debugfs_wedged and drm_lib.sh

[Joonas Lahtinen]

On pe, 2016-10-07 at 10:38 +0300, Jani Nikula wrote:
> The "change" to use bash just reflects current reality. All the changes
> here look simple and sane, and immediately improve the results. The work
> is already done, no use blocking them because someone might eventually
> rewrite them in C. (And it will be a PITA to write the module reload
> test in C, so I wouldn't hold my breath.)
> 

The scripts are really simple, most of the scripts even use POSIX sh
compliant constructs but just the wrong shebang. And sometimes some a
advanced bash feature here and there which could be replaced easily.

> For the series,
> 
> Reviewed-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula at intel.com>
> 
> 
> PS. When I look at IGT and the macro/setjmp/longjmp magic to create the
> test/subtest/fixture infrastructure, making the tests look like they've
> been written in some extended version of C, I have to question whether C
> really is the right language for the tests. libdrm python bindings and
> python, anyone?

My patches to convert away from bash were to allow running the tests in
minimal initramfs environment where the kernel + IGT would be a
standalone bzImage suitable for netbooting, but we can go to another
direction too, and lets add Java as runtime requirement for I-G-T!

Regards, Joonas

<plaintext>I'm against converting to bash/python for no
benefit.</plaintext>
-- 
Joonas Lahtinen
Open Source Technology Center
Intel Corporation