From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: From: Eric Anholt In-Reply-To: <20190116163903.12785-1-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> References: <20190116163903.12785-1-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2019 14:41:21 -0800 Message-ID: <87d0owgr8u.fsf@anholt.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [igt-dev] [PATCH] drm/doc: Make igts for cross-driver stuff mandatory List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0354616219==" Errors-To: igt-dev-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "igt-dev" To: Daniel Vetter , DRI Development , IGT development Cc: Petri Latvala , Liviu Dudau , Daniel Vetter , Alex Deucher , Dave Airlie , Sean Paul List-ID: --===============0354616219== Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Daniel Vetter writes: > Compared to the RFC[1] no changes to the patch itself, but igt moved > forward a lot: > > - gitlab CI builds with: reduced configs/libraries, arm cross build > and a sysroot build (should address all the build/cross platform > concerns raised in the RFC discussions). > > - tests reorganized into subdirectories so that the i915-gem tests > don't clog the main/shared tests directory anymore > > - quite a few more non-intel people contributing/reviewing/committing > igt tests patches. > > I think this addresses all the concerns raised in the RFC discussions, > and assuming there's enough Acks and no new issues that pop up, we can > go ahead with this. > > 1: https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10648851/ > Cc: Petri Latvala > Cc: Arkadiusz Hiler > Cc: Liviu Dudau > Cc: Sean Paul > Cc: Eric Anholt > Cc: Alex Deucher > Cc: Dave Airlie > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter igt is a bit awkward to work in (the mailing list is very noisy with the Intel CI being email-based instead of gitlab-based and most of the traffic being Intel), but it's the right place to be putting shared tests and hopefully that pain point goes away eventually using gitlab MRs. I think there are going to be some interesting questions on how to deal with things like KMS properties that aren't amenable to chamelium/writeback-based testing. However, we should default to requiring tests and only skip that when we agree collectively that something isn't testable currently. Reviewed-by: Eric Anholt --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEE/JuuFDWp9/ZkuCBXtdYpNtH8nugFAlw/sxEACgkQtdYpNtH8 nugZCBAAhv0gmpmh0B1dxx/EnycJqf6t4K5yCUOJb9ok72INtF9og1mzlrpvAoZ/ rItUWVFLYvxGJvME3KtIR410OZtyxcWUTaEFpykXHEI+GOSxFTBxcBe4HpMJs/yD xYayaYsbulgW9RzkL8jDEmhU9pSnScyDJ6YJoDJPC3nTTgOR7GFQ38bnEPHp7ezz yD6H0Duw69RGwi3zGXIqfFt6GZMxLuAmygiAvJzhFqONYYGuPYkRa/gGsENGe1CV 2APhtSuu8I+wgt1JAijC9GZGkiNSJUcdAnhheEeWNn+9p3ZaoJDBRBepeelXbaVp ogxPS/kJBqvauKqztJVp4otortUihD3QzHHehAwN3N2LwixZ82W4kFDvxthP3WsS zTInIjIeHYArAYUqY8c6IzEJnHiCr7zGR8GOrWHpemNz+Cs9/5DqXo+mORHBDeYL ZTVpgMbm+4tsWRdD+yM2ffb4RN1I4ji0V3QJjCm7GjhnCscmfizwaivUJ2FDKwfi 6fVXlHOfHX9y0tnPfHvFT70RdKaSKxwhSQXeWtkTkWVAIAuPTOWKgFilcBzcWB+z eKZp1uGNKjj7nRP1W4YaZRlSUU6PeB/ZVGwXw+lW9Bxkq9OTOFvbZbspDUIdpUJP SZK/QpA0R/pkyUFkJtxcA+/hLPJr9R0IVgyoTHMn0pZQJxBDuoY= =XQps -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=-- --===============0354616219== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18KaWd0LWRldiBt YWlsaW5nIGxpc3QKaWd0LWRldkBsaXN0cy5mcmVlZGVza3RvcC5vcmcKaHR0cHM6Ly9saXN0cy5m cmVlZGVza3RvcC5vcmcvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby9pZ3QtZGV2Cg== --===============0354616219==--