[Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t 1/2] intel-ci: Unblacklist selftests

[Tomi Sarvela]

On 07/17/2018 03:52 PM, Chris Wilson wrote:
> The CI infrastructure is ready and is already running the kernel
> selftests in BAT, so there is no reason to blacklist them from the
> shards.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
> Cc: Tomi Sarvela <tomi.p.sarvela at intel.com>
> Cc: Petri Latvala <petri.latvala at intel.com>
> Cc: Martin Peres <martin.peres at linux.intel.com>
> ---
>   tests/intel-ci/blacklist.txt | 2 --
>   1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tests/intel-ci/blacklist.txt b/tests/intel-ci/blacklist.txt
> index d65d8ff35..7faec8b5c 100644
> --- a/tests/intel-ci/blacklist.txt
> +++ b/tests/intel-ci/blacklist.txt
> @@ -2,8 +2,6 @@ igt at meta_test(@.*)?
>   ###############################################
>   # GEM
>   ###############################################
> -igt at drv_selftest(@.*)?
> -igt at drm_mm(@.*)?
>   igt at gem_busy@.*hang.*
>   igt at gem_close_race@(?!.*basic).*
>   igt at gem_concurrent_blit(@.*)?
> 

 From Intel-GFX-CI point of view:

Because of the test order randomization, this blacklist is used by IGT 
builder when creating the randomized testlists for shard nodes, and 
builder might or might not have knowledge of i915 or selftests.

The selftests are scraped to their own testlist in kernel build time (as 
they are kernel specific) and used separately after fast-feedback or as 
a last shard in a full run.

I'd advise not to whitelist drv_selftests or drm_mm. If the selftest 
coverage is considered full replacement for gem_exec_flush tests, then 
remove blacklisting of igt at gem_exec_flush@(?!.*basic).* from 
blacklist.txt and remove same tests from fast-feedback.testlist.

Regards,

Tomi
-- 
Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo