On 4/26/19 9:14 PM, Eric Anholt wrote:
Alyssa Rosenzweig <[email protected]> writes:
We start by building a container in Docker that contains a suitable
rootfs and kernel for the DUT, deqp and all dependencies for building
Mesa itself.
Out of curiosity, what's the performance impact of this? If there are no
changes to the kernel or to deqp (but mesa had a commit somewhere in
Panfrost space), do we have to rebuild the former two? Does ccache maybe
pick that up? I'm trying to get a sense for how long it takes between
pushing a commit and getting a CI answer, and maybe if that can be
shortened.
the expectations that are stored
in git.
Might it be better to track this outside so we don't pollute mesa with
changes to that largely autogenerated file? Or I guess that's
problematic since then we lose branch information / etc.
Hopefully just current expected fails get stored in git.
Actually, passes were being stored as well :)
Thanks for the idea!
Is there an automated way to do this based on the results of LAVA/CI?
+ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/KhronosGroup/VK-GL-CTS.git .
&& \
Is this the right repo? I recall getting deqp source from Google's
servers (Chromium git). I suppose it's the same.
VK-GL-CTS is the official conformance suite, and it includes dEQP. You
need to use a release tag, or you'll have extra garbage tests expecting
nonstandardized behavior being run. Same for dEQP master.
Done.
Thanks,
Tomeu
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
