[Intel-gfx] [PATCH igt 0/8] Non-Intel test suite fixes

[Daniel Vetter]

On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 01:32:17PM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> On Monday, 19 March 2018 18:41:05 EET Ulrich Hecht wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 9:55 AM, Daniel Vetter <daniel at ffwll.ch> wrote:
> > > On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 03:45:36PM +0100, Ulrich Hecht wrote:
> > >> Hi!
> > >> 
> > >> I have run the tests on a Renesas R-Car M3-W's DU device, and have found
> > >> a number of false negatives that mostly stem from use of Intel-specifics
> > >> without checking if that makes sense first. So here's a bunch of fixes
> > >> for those, hope they are generic enough for upstreaming.
> > > 
> > > Nice, other people using this! Do you plan to maintain this actively going
> > > forward, or is this more a one-off effort?
> > 
> > For now, this is just an attempt at evaluating if this works for us.
> > It has caught a few things that look like legitimate bugs to me,
> > though...
> 
> That's good news ! (Not that I'm happy that we have bugs, but catching them 
> shows that igt is useful for us). I hope this will help convincing management 
> that we should keep contributing to igt going forward.

Yeah I'm really hoping other vendors could join the fun, and long-term
we'd have a real kms validation suite. There's always going to be a need
for vendor-specific tests (and we're happy to merge them, see e.g. vc4),
but having a test suite that tries to be generic as much as possible, for
an uapi that tries to be generic too, seems like a really good idea.

Very much welcome on board!

Aside: If there's anything we can do to help convince your management that
this is good idea (like the rename from intel-gpu-tools to igt gpu tests
we've done), please bring it up.

Cheers, Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch