[Piglit] [PATCH] arb_clear_texture: add a trivial test

[Eric Anholt]

Ilia Mirkin <imirkin at alum.mit.edu> writes:

> On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 2:38 PM, Eric Anholt <eric at anholt.net> wrote:
>> Ilia Mirkin <imirkin at alum.mit.edu> writes:

>>
>> Other than that, this is a nice simple test.  We're going to want an
>> all-the-formats testcase before we land clear_texture in Mesa, but this
>> is a good start.
>
> Absolutely. And testing glClearTexSubImage too (where the visual
> representation may become more interesting). And an api-errors style
> test. And I want to test various widths/heights, in case e.g. POT
> works but NPOT doesn't. I'm thinking that 32 and 33 actually cover
> most cases.

This all sounds good!

> Should I make these into subtests, or is it fine to just have the one
> test? Long-term, should this 'simple' test go away entirely in favor
> of a all-formats test that does it all?

I think there's a lot to be said for having a dead simple sanity test
test, along with all the complicated stuff.  When you're first lighting
up the extension, having all the other variants in the way obscures the
initial debugging.

For similar reasons, I lean toward separate test files instead of
subtests unless the code sharing is massive.  I'm trying to optimize for
me debugging the driver in the future, not me writing the test now.  The
bodies of tests don't change much over time, so there's less maintenance
burden from code duplication than in most codebases we work on.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 818 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/piglit/attachments/20140307/9a3c1504/attachment.pgp>