On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 6:50 AM, Andres Gomez <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > as complementary work to the one done to "Add FP64 support to the i965 > shader backends" at: > https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=92760 > > We've been working to add piglit tests that would check the new features > added by this addition. Because of this, we have created several > generators. > > Checking other generators that also apply to fp64, we have seen that > those generate "duplicated" tests for: > * glsl-4.00 > * arb_gpu_shader_fp64 > > Probably, this makes sense but we are also seeing that individual tests > that are coded for the extension at: > * tests/spec/arb_gpu_shader_fp64 > > Do not have a counterpart at: > * tests/spec/glsl-4.00 > > So, the question would be, when doing tests for an extension: > * Should we make the generators create "duplicated" tests for the > extension and for the glsl version that takes the features of > the extension into the core? Our guess is, "yes".
Right, since it's usually trivial to make the generator scripts produce tests for multiple APIs, we do it. > * Should we duplicate also the individual tests in the same way? > Our guess is, again, "yes", but we do not know if this would be > too overkill. We don't usually duplicate non-generated tests. There's usually not any chance of a feature working in one API but not the other. One case where we do sometimes duplicate non-generated tests for equivalent functionality is Desktop GL vs ES, partly because the equivalent functionality is often provided by different extensions between the APIs. So to answer your main question, I would generate tests for both glsl-4.00 and arb_gpu_shader_fp64, but only manually write tests for arb_gpu_shader_fp64. _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
