On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 06:44:29PM -0700, Chad Versace wrote: > On 05/03/2013 04:26 AM, Topi Pohjolainen wrote: > >Signed-off-by: Topi Pohjolainen <[email protected]> > >--- > > .../ext_image_dma_buf_import/CMakeLists.gles2.txt | 14 ++ > > .../ext_image_dma_buf_import/sample_argb8888.c | 217 > > +++++++++++++++++++++ > > 2 files changed, 231 insertions(+) > > create mode 100644 tests/spec/ext_image_dma_buf_import/CMakeLists.gles2.txt > > create mode 100644 tests/spec/ext_image_dma_buf_import/sample_argb8888.c > > Individually, the three following tests overall look good. I don't see any > problem with > any one. > > However, the tests duplicate a lot of code. When several tests in a family > all share > similar code, what is typically done in Piglit is create a single test > executable with > a command line parameters that chooses the subtest. For a good example, see > depthstencil-render-miplevels.c
I fully agree and in fact I already refactored it. I noticed Eric's helper for compiling simple shader programs, and while revisioning my own tests I thought better sharing almost all the logic between the tests. > > Ok, that concludes my review for v5. It looks like the series is nearing > completion > and should be ready for committing soon. _______________________________________________ Piglit mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/piglit
