On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 03:23:58PM +0000, Deepak Singh Rawat wrote: > > > diff --git a/tests/meson.build b/tests/meson.build > > > index 697ff515..5acd7aa2 100644 > > > --- a/tests/meson.build > > > +++ b/tests/meson.build > > > @@ -9,6 +9,7 @@ test_progs = [ > > > 'debugfs_test', > > > 'drm_import_export', > > > 'drm_mm', > > > + 'drm_plane_damage', > > > > For future proofing I think it'd be much better if we call this drm_kms or > > similar. The individual subtest results will be all exposed, but there's a > > bit a problem when we always have to upgrade both igt and the kernel at > > the same time. At least with the current CI infrastructure. > > Do you mean drm_kms_plane_damage? IIUC this is to allow running test > from run-test.sh? I suppose in that case it should be named > kms_plane_damage, because all other kms test starts with kms_*.
Ah yes, sticking to the kms_ prefix is a good idea. kms_selftests is what I'd recommend. For both the igt wrapper here, and the kernel module. That way it's a natural place to add all kinds of kms self tests in the future, without the need to go through the basic scaffolding steps again. Cheers, Daniel > > > > > I'm also asking the ARM folks to type selftests for the new block_* format > > description stuff, so this will come in handy real soon. > > -Daniel > > > > > 'drm_read', > > > 'drv_getparams_basic', > > > 'drv_hangman', > > > -- > > > 2.17.1 -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
