public inbox for intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>
To: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>,
	Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospurio@intel.com>,
	Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Ankitprasad Sharma <ankitprasad.r.sharma@intel.com>,
	intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [RFC i-g-t 0/6] Drop tests for object creation from stolen
Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2017 14:09:31 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1507028971.4728.44.camel@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171003083110.alwhbrhq62byevdm@phenom.ffwll.local>

On Tue, 2017-10-03 at 10:31 +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 02, 2017 at 04:00:12PM -0700, Daniele Ceraolo Spurio wrote:
> > The tests were merged before the feature, which never made it to the
> > driver; the last update I could find ([1]) is more than a year old.
> > The tests are using a wrong getparam number and planned extensions
> > to the gem_create and get_aperture ioctl structures that don't match
> > what's currently in i915. Due to this all stolen-related subtests are
> > skipping.
> > Given the fact that there has been no traction behind the feature for
> > a long time it doesn't look like we'll need those tests anytime soon
> > and thus it makes sense to remove them.
> > 
> > The patches didn't revert cleanly and also contained some improvements
> > that are worth keeping, so instead of a revert I've organized the removal
> > in a single patch per test file to drop only the unneeded code.
> > 
> > [1] https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/659/
> > 
> > Cc: Ankitprasad Sharma <ankitprasad.r.sharma@intel.com>
> > Cc: Petri Latvala <petri.latvala@intel.com>
> > Cc: Arkadiusz Hiler <arkadiusz.hiler@intel.com>
> > Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
> > Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> 
> 
> Ack from my side on the entire series. Merging stuff before the kernel
> side has landed is a good way to piss of Dave Airlie. Yes CI right now
> doesn't support testing both a kernel and an igt branch at the same time,
> so not that useful for testing new features. It's on the list, but then CI
> is primarily about preventing regressions, not so much about making sure
> new stuff works perfectly out of the box (would be good too ofc).

We can always bother Tomi/Arek to make a special run, but all that time
could be spent on adding the support for something along the lines
of "Depends-on: patchwork.freedesktop.org/XYZ"

Anyway this is,

Acked-by: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>

Regards, Joonas
-- 
Joonas Lahtinen
Open Source Technology Center
Intel Corporation
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

      parent reply	other threads:[~2017-10-03 11:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-10-02 23:00 [RFC i-g-t 0/6] Drop tests for object creation from stolen Daniele Ceraolo Spurio
2017-10-02 23:00 ` [RFC i-g-t 1/6] tests/gem_pread: drop stolen memory related subtests Daniele Ceraolo Spurio
2017-10-03 11:08   ` Chris Wilson
2017-10-03 15:36     ` Daniele Ceraolo Spurio
2017-10-03 15:49       ` Chris Wilson
2017-10-03 16:02         ` Daniele Ceraolo Spurio
2017-10-02 23:00 ` [RFC i-g-t 2/6] tests/gem_pwrite: " Daniele Ceraolo Spurio
2017-10-03 11:08   ` Chris Wilson
2017-10-02 23:00 ` [RFC i-g-t 3/6] tests/gem_create: drop stolen memory related subtest Daniele Ceraolo Spurio
2017-10-02 23:00 ` [RFC i-g-t 4/6] tests/gem_stolen: drop gem_stolen.c Daniele Ceraolo Spurio
2017-10-03  9:19   ` Petri Latvala
2017-10-02 23:00 ` [RFC i-g-t 5/6] tests/gem_concurrent_all: drop stolen memory related subtests Daniele Ceraolo Spurio
2017-10-03 11:11   ` Chris Wilson
2017-10-03 16:14     ` Daniele Ceraolo Spurio
2017-10-03 16:25       ` Chris Wilson
2017-10-02 23:00 ` [RFC i-g-t 6/6] lib/ioctl_wrappers: drop stolen memory related wrappers Daniele Ceraolo Spurio
2017-10-02 23:37 ` ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for Drop tests for object creation from stolen Patchwork
2017-10-03  0:30 ` ✓ Fi.CI.IGT: " Patchwork
2017-10-03  8:31 ` [RFC i-g-t 0/6] " Daniel Vetter
2017-10-03  9:30   ` Petri Latvala
2017-10-03 11:11     ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2017-10-03 11:09   ` Joonas Lahtinen [this message]

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=1507028971.4728.44.camel@linux.intel.com \
    --to=joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=ankitprasad.r.sharma@intel.com \
    --cc=chris@chris-wilson.co.uk \
    --cc=daniel@ffwll.ch \
    --cc=daniele.ceraolospurio@intel.com \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    /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