From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com>
To: Petri Latvala <petri.latvala@intel.com>,
Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospurio@intel.com>,
joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com
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, 3 Oct 2017 12:11:26 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4befdbc2-7b25-3af8-4f2f-8b9ef7d118a7@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171003093033.5fgeiw3nep3zhhsi@platvala-desk.ger.corp.intel.com>
On 03/10/2017 10:30, Petri Latvala wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 03, 2017 at 10:31:10AM +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).
>
> Series is
> Acked-by: Petri Latvala <petri.latvala@intel.com>
> as well, with an addition posted separately to patch 4. GEM people
> could give their blessing as well before landing this, Joonas?
Acked-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Regards,
Tvrtko
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-10-03 11:11 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 [this message]
2017-10-03 11:09 ` Joonas Lahtinen
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=4befdbc2-7b25-3af8-4f2f-8b9ef7d118a7@linux.intel.com \
--to=tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=ankitprasad.r.sharma@intel.com \
--cc=daniele.ceraolospurio@intel.com \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=petri.latvala@intel.com \
/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