Re: [PATCH i-g-t] tests/kms_flip: Adjust tolerance when counting frames

[Gabriel Feceoru <gabriel.feceoru@intel.com>]

On 10.05.2016 16:52, Jani Nikula wrote:
> On Tue, 10 May 2016, Gabriel Feceoru <gabriel.feceoru@intel.com> wrote:
>> Comparing 2 numbers with 1% accuracy depends on which one is the
>> reference. If count == 100 and expected == 99 this condition fails,
>> although it should pass.
>
> Well, the expectation should be the reference. If you expect 50 at 50%
> tolerance, 25..75 is okay. 100 is clearly out of tolerance, but your
> method would accept it too.
>
> Would it help to round the lower limit down and upper limit up? I think
> that would be more acceptable.

Yes, you are right. I'll adjust it to 98/100 and 102/100.

Thanks,
Gabriel.

>
> BR,
> Jani.
>
>> Signed-off-by: Gabriel Feceoru <gabriel.feceoru@intel.com>
>> ---
>>   tests/kms_flip.c | 3 ++-
>>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/tests/kms_flip.c b/tests/kms_flip.c
>> index eda2fcc..938b32d 100644
>> --- a/tests/kms_flip.c
>> +++ b/tests/kms_flip.c
>> @@ -1187,7 +1187,8 @@ static void check_final_state(struct test_output *o, struct event_state *es,
>>
>>   		count *= o->seq_step;
>>   		expected = elapsed / frame_time(o);
>> -		igt_assert_f(count >= expected * 99/100 && count <= expected * 101/100,
>> +		igt_assert_f((count >= expected * 99/100 && count <= expected * 101/100) ||
>> +			     (expected >= count * 99/100 && expected <= count * 101/100),
>>   			     "dropped frames, expected %d, counted %d, encoder type %d\n",
>>   			     expected, count, o->kencoder[0]->encoder_type);
>>   	}
>
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx