[Piglit] [PATCH 0/5] Randomized UBO tests of doom

[Ian Romanick]

There is at least one bigger bug in this series, and fixing it will
require changes to shader-runner too.  I had some e-mail either from one
of the guys at VMware or one of the guys at NVIDIA, but I can't find it.

My recollection is that there is some case in the generator (and
shader-runner in general) that expects non-base elements of arrays to be
advertised, but the spec says they should not be advertised.  I think
the case was that for a UBO like

struct S {
    int i;
    float f;
};

uniform U {
    S s[4];
};

only s[0].i and s[0].f would be reported, but shader-runner expects all
elements of s[] to be reported.

This will be annoying to fix because shader-runner relies on this to
determine the offsets s[1].i and friends.

It should be relatively easy to figure out what the failure case is.  I
think there's already a test in piglit that misuses the feature, and
that test fails on NVIDIA's closed-source driver.

On 01/12/2016 03:09 PM, Ilia Mirkin wrote:
> My fixes are one-liners (might just be one, I forget). At this point I
> would very much like to see *anything* checked in, and we can improve
> from there.
> 
> On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 6:04 PM, Dylan Baker <baker.dylan.c at gmail.com> wrote:
>> That sounds like a plan. Would you like to get Ian's original scripts
>> merged, and I'll update the cleanups I have for his scripts and send them
>> out?
>>
>> Dylan
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 2:41 PM, Timothy Arceri <t_arceri at yahoo.com.au>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, 2015-11-10 at 16:46 -0800, Dylan Baker wrote:
>>>> Since gravy is so delicious,
>>>>
>>>> https://github.com/dcbaker/piglit.git wip/ubo-fuzzer
>>>>
>>>> bin/piglit run ubo-fuzzer output
>>>>
>>>> Obviously it's not at all feature complete, it's more proof of
>>>> concept
>>>> than anything else, but gravy.
>>>
>>> Hi Dylan,
>>>
>>> I took a quick look at your branch and I'd like to suggest a way
>>> forward on this.
>>>
>>> It looks like you made a bunch of small/fixes tidy ups to Ian's
>>> scripts, how about we get those sent out for review/comment then commit
>>> the script to the main piglit repo.
>>>
>>> Ilia and I can then rebase our modifications, resend for review and
>>> commit those.
>>>
>>> Then we can worry about gravy once we have all the work in one place.
>>>
>>> How does that sound?
>>>
>>> Tim
>>>
>>>> On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 03:01 11AM -0500, Ilia Mirkin wrote:
>>>>> That's a full step ahead of my suggestion. I just want the thing in
>>>>> a
>>>>> shared place so that I can run it when doing dodgy things to code I
>>>>> don't understand... if there's some automated process running it,
>>>>> that's just gravy on top.
>>>>>
>>>> [snip]
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Piglit mailing list
> Piglit at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/piglit