[PATCH weston v2 6/6] tests: Properly report skipped tests

[Pekka Paalanen]

On Fri,  7 Feb 2014 09:34:48 +0100
Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <pochu27 at gmail.com> wrote:

> From: Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <emilio.pozuelo at collabora.co.uk>
> 
> We were calling exit(0) when tests were skipped, which counted
> them as passed instead of skipped. Fix this by properly exiting
> with 77 (which is what automake expects for skipped tests) from
> the tests themselves, then returning 77 again from weston-test-runner
> if all the tests were skipped. Finally the weston-test.so module
> catches weston-test-runner's exit code and uses it as an exit code,
> which is what automake will see and use.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <emilio.pozuelo at collabora.co.uk>

Hi,

I tested this v2 series and it looks good. Tried both the default
(headless) and the x11 backends.

The xwayland test hangs, but it hangs also before these changes. I
doubt it is caused by my xwayland setup, because I can run xterm via
xwayland on compositor-x11 just fine.

'make check' works fine with xwayland test disabled, but I cannot have
'make distcheck' pass, because it hangs on xwayland.

The buffer-count test is skipped correctly, if egl_gallium is not
available.

If egl_gallium is built in Mesa, then buffer-count test fails with
"buffers used = 0". This happens because the headless backend does not
initialize the server side EGL, wl_drm global is never created, and the
client side EGL then falls back to software rendering, which is only
possible with egl_gallium. Obviously no wl_drm buffers will be used.

On x11 backend, buffer-count test succeeds, because wl_drm is
advertised, intel driver cannot load on egl_gallium so it falls back to
egl_dri2, and it ends up working. But presumably only on the intel
driver, since nouveau and radeon can load on egl_gallium, and I suspect
egl_gallium might not have the latest buffer management algorithm.

All in all, this series is reviewed and tested by me; ok to merge.

Neil, do you have suggestions on improving the buffer-count test?


Thanks,
pq