From: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>
To: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>
Cc: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com>,
intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org,
Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>,
ryszard.knop@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/xe: Sort again the info flags
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2024 12:53:05 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87a5ds26zy.fsf@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <gh2z4erofoxvb5npgoopc7cq7b32erdfxeqztroseyqywmel5o@fc6r37gczlpk>
On Wed, 20 Nov 2024, Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com> wrote:
> IMO we should turn all these "checks run on the build machine" rather
> than "checks executed on the target hosts" part of the hooks infra....
> because that is much more visible than scripts hidden inside the CI
> pipeline. And then people can even run on their own machines.
Going on a slight tangent, thinking aloud. Could we split the load more
between running on target and running in, say, qemu? Like, there's no
point in running some of the drm selftests on each target host. And
could we move more towards splitting igt this direction too?
BR,
Jani.
--
Jani Nikula, Intel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-11-21 10:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-11-18 22:33 [PATCH] drm/xe: Sort again the info flags Lucas De Marchi
2024-11-18 23:05 ` ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for " Patchwork
2024-11-18 23:05 ` ✓ CI.checkpatch: " Patchwork
2024-11-18 23:06 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: " Patchwork
2024-11-18 23:14 ` [PATCH] " Cavitt, Jonathan
2024-11-18 23:24 ` ✓ CI.Build: success for " Patchwork
2024-11-18 23:26 ` ✓ CI.Hooks: " Patchwork
2024-11-18 23:28 ` ✓ CI.checksparse: " Patchwork
2024-11-18 23:50 ` ✓ CI.BAT: " Patchwork
2024-11-19 10:51 ` [PATCH] " Matthew Auld
2024-11-19 17:08 ` Lucas De Marchi
2024-11-20 12:16 ` Jani Nikula
2024-11-20 14:16 ` Lucas De Marchi
2024-11-21 10:53 ` Jani Nikula [this message]
2024-11-21 16:54 ` Lucas De Marchi
2024-11-25 15:36 ` Jani Nikula
2024-11-19 11:04 ` ✗ CI.FULL: failure for " Patchwork
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=87a5ds26zy.fsf@intel.com \
--to=jani.nikula@linux.intel.com \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=lucas.demarchi@intel.com \
--cc=matthew.auld@intel.com \
--cc=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
--cc=ryszard.knop@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).