[Piglit] [RFC] One enum coverage test or many?

Eric Anholt eric at anholt.net
Fri Feb 17 11:53:24 PST 2012

On Fri, 17 Feb 2012 10:39:23 -0800, Ian Romanick <idr at freedesktop.org> wrote:
> I'm working on some generated "coverage" tests.  For each extension (or 
> core GL version), these tests try every possible pname enum to the 
> various get commands.  The tests just verify that no error is generated 
> if the extension is supported or that INVALID_ENUM is generated if the 
> extension is not supported.
> Right now, a separate test is generated for each extension.  As a 
> result, there are a bunch of ext_foo-get-enum-coverage tests.  I'm a bit 
> torn between this implementation and one giant test that just pokes at 
> everything.

Separate tests imo.

Does it also manage to get the enums to produce different values when
requested?  I've seen many bugs where the enum is in place, but it's
returning the wrong copy-and-pasted piece of the GL context.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/piglit/attachments/20120217/ee5b88bf/attachment.pgp>

More information about the Piglit mailing list