From: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
To: Maxime Ripard <mripard@kernel.org>,
Simona Vetter <simona.vetter@ffwll.ch>
Cc: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org,
Carlos Eduardo Gallo Filho <gcarlos@disroot.org>,
Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>,
Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@suse.de>,
Jeff Johnson <quic_jjohnson@quicinc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] drm: revert some framebuffer API tests
Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2024 15:10:14 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <877caqu2mx.fsf@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240925-fresh-artichoke-boa-1a673f@houat>
On Wed, 25 Sep 2024, Maxime Ripard <mripard@kernel.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 25, 2024 at 01:52:02PM GMT, Simona Vetter wrote:
>> I think for at least drm the consensus is clear, we won't have kunit tests
>> that splat.
>
> Where was that ever discussed?
Well, where was it ever agreed that it's okay for drm kunit tests to
emit warnings? :p
>> Personally I really don't see the point of unit tests that are
>> somewhere between unecessarily hard or outright too much pain to
>> deploy in a test rig: Either you don't run them (not great), or you
>> filter splats and might filter too much (not great either) or you
>> filter as little as possible and fight false positives (also kinda
>> suboptimal).
>
> Or you don't do any of that, and just rely on the canonical way to run
> kunit test and trust it's going to pass tests that do indeed pass, and
> fail / warn on those that don't.
That still doesn't address code being tested emitting *unexpected*
warnings.
BR,
Jani.
--
Jani Nikula, Intel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-10-02 12:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-09-17 17:43 [PATCH 0/2] drm: revert some framebuffer API tests Jani Nikula
2024-09-17 17:43 ` [PATCH 1/2] Revert "drm/tests: Add test for drm_framebuffer_free()" Jani Nikula
2024-09-17 17:43 ` [PATCH 2/2] Revert "drm/tests: Add test for drm_framebuffer_init()" Jani Nikula
2024-09-24 10:06 ` [PATCH 0/2] drm: revert some framebuffer API tests Simona Vetter
2024-09-24 11:54 ` Maxime Ripard
2024-09-24 13:37 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-09-24 13:56 ` Maxime Ripard
2024-09-24 15:09 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-09-24 15:56 ` Jani Nikula
2024-09-24 16:35 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-09-24 16:57 ` Maxime Ripard
2024-09-24 17:37 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-09-25 9:41 ` Jani Nikula
2024-09-25 12:59 ` Maxime Ripard
2024-09-25 15:57 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-09-25 11:52 ` Simona Vetter
2024-09-25 13:05 ` Maxime Ripard
2024-09-25 16:04 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-09-26 7:05 ` Maxime Ripard
2024-10-02 12:10 ` Jani Nikula [this message]
2024-10-03 12:04 ` Maxime Ripard
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=877caqu2mx.fsf@intel.com \
--to=jani.nikula@intel.com \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=gcarlos@disroot.org \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=linux@roeck-us.net \
--cc=maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com \
--cc=mripard@kernel.org \
--cc=quic_jjohnson@quicinc.com \
--cc=simona.vetter@ffwll.ch \
--cc=tzimmermann@suse.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).