Re: [PATCH v3 3/9] drm/ci: mediatek: Add job to test panfrost and powervr GPU driver

[Helen Koike <helen.koike@collabora.com>]

On 19/02/2024 06:39, Vignesh Raman wrote:
> Hi Helen,
> 
> On 09/02/24 23:51, Helen Koike wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 30/01/2024 12:03, Vignesh Raman wrote:
>>> For mediatek mt8173, the GPU driver is powervr and for mediatek
>>> mt8183, the GPU driver is panfrost. So add support in drm-ci to
>>> test panfrost and powervr GPU driver for mediatek SOCs and update
>>> xfails. Powervr driver was merged in linux kernel, but there's no
>>> mediatek support yet. So disable the mt8173-gpu job which uses
>>> powervr driver.
>>>
>>> Add panfrost specific tests to testlist and skip KMS tests for
>>> panfrost driver since it is not a not a KMS driver. Also update
>>> the MAINTAINERS file to include xfails for panfrost driver.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Vignesh Raman <vignesh.raman@collabora.com>
>>
>> Hi Vignesh, thanks for your work.
>>
>> I'm still wondering about a few things, please check below.
>>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> v2:
>>>    - Add panfrost and PVR GPU jobs for mediatek SOC with new xfails, 
>>> add xfail
>>>      entry to MAINTAINERS.
>>
>> Maybe we should review how the xfails failes are named. I think they 
>> should start with the DRIVER_NAME instead of GPU_VERSION.
>>
>> For instance, consider the following job:
>>
>> mediatek:mt8183-gpu:
>>    extends:
>>      - .mt8183
>>    variables:
>>      GPU_VERSION: mediatek-mt8183-gpu
>>      DRIVER_NAME: panfrost
>>
>> And we have mediatek-mt8183-gpu-skips.txt
>>
>> If there is an error, we want to notify the panfrost driver 
>> maintainers (and maybe not the mediatek driver maintainers), so 
>> MAINTAINERS file doesn't correspond to this.
> 
> Agree.
> 
>>
>> How about a naming <driver name>_<hardware/gpu>_<type: gpu/display> ?
>>
>> powervr_mediatek-mt8173_gpu-skipts.txt
>> mediatek_mediatek-mt8173_display-skipts.txt
>> panfrost_mediatek-mt8183_gpu-skips.txt
>> mediatek_mediatek-mt8183_display-skips.txt
>> ...
>>
>> What do you think?
> 
> Yes we can keep this naming. In this case do we still need gpu/display 
> in the xfails file name?

If you think this split is not required, then I'm fine dropping it.

Regards,
Helen

> 
> Regards,
> Vignesh

_______________________________________________
Linux-rockchip mailing list
Linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-rockchip