[Piglit] [PATCH v3 2/2] arb_transform_feedback_overflow_query: add error tests.
imirkin at alum.mit.edu
Thu Dec 15 19:33:59 UTC 2016
On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 2:27 PM, Rafael Antognolli
<rafael.antognolli at intel.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 10:58:10AM -0800, Dylan Baker wrote:
>> Quoting Rafael Antognolli (2016-12-13 14:51:14)
>> > Add tests to verify that GL_ERROR_VALUE is returned if an invalid
>> > index is used to begin, end or get a current query.
>> > v2:
>> > - Add test to all.py (Ilia Mirkin)
>> > - Add check for ARB_transform_feedback_overflow_query extension
>> > v3:
>> > - Skip test if some extensions are not present (Ilia Mirkin)
>> > Signed-off-by: Rafael Antognolli <rafael.antognolli at intel.com>
>> > ---
>> > tests/all.py | 2 +
>> > .../CMakeLists.gl.txt | 1 +
>> > .../arb_transform_feedback_overflow_query/errors.c | 279 +++++++++++++++++++++
>> > 3 files changed, 282 insertions(+)
>> > create mode 100644 tests/spec/arb_transform_feedback_overflow_query/errors.c
>> > diff --git a/tests/all.py b/tests/all.py
>> > index 888f25f..dbfe225 100644
>> > --- a/tests/all.py
>> > +++ b/tests/all.py
>> > @@ -3680,6 +3680,8 @@ with profile.test_list.group_manager(
>> > grouptools.join('spec', 'arb_transform_feedback_overflow_query')) as g:
>> > g(['arb_transform_feedback_overflow_query-basic'],
>> > 'arb_transform_feedback_overflow_query-basic', run_concurrent=False)
>> > + g(['arb_transform_feedback_overflow_query-errors'],
>> > + 'arb_transform_feedback_overflow_query-errors', run_concurrent=False)
>> See my comment on the previous patch here too.
> Hmm... makes sense, I just saw how it is used in other places. I can fix
>> Also, I just noticed that you're setting run_concurrent to False, is there a
>> particular reason that these tests need to be run serially? Generally only tests
>> that do front buffer rendering or have CPU/GPU synchronization requirements need
>> to be set to run_concurrent.
> No front buffer rendering, but I'm not sure about CPU/GPU
> synchronization. I mean, when we try to get the result from a query on
> the CPU, it does wait for the GPU, but I'm not sure that's what you are
> talking about.
> I was mainly copying & pasting from
> arb_transform_feedback3-query_with_invalid_index, which does much less
> stuff that the overflow_query does, and it still uses
> run_concurrent=False. It just does some queries with invalid
> parameters. Is that also not needed?
Probably not. My guess is that 99% of the existing
run_concurrent=False settings aren't needed. But in 1% of the cases it
*is* needed, and it's a pain to read all the tests and verify.
More information about the Piglit