I have sent out a v3 of this patch, which I believe addresses the issues raised.
On Thursday 29 August 2013 17:54:57 Eric Anholt wrote: > Tom Stellard <[email protected]> writes: > > On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 12:35:02PM -0700, Dylan Baker wrote: > >> Previously every subtest wrote an entry in the file as a full test, this > >> is a bug since the fake-fulltest (actually subtest) reported with the > >> full test value, not it's own value. > >> > >> This patch changes the behvaior so that a test with subtests only gets > >> one entry, with the full test result value as it's value. > > > > I would really like the old behavior preserved. If each subtest doesn't > > have its own entry in the summary, then there is really no point to > > having subtests. > > > > I am having a little trouble following the code, so here are some examples > > of the past and current behavior to help clarify the situation. > > > > Lets say we have a Test A with subtests: > > 1 => 'FAIL' > > 2 => 'PASS' > > 3 => 'FAIL' > > > > The original way of displaying this (i.e before > > eeec306bc2197a2fc0eeb064462a1244d39c16fa) was: > > > > A 2/3 > > 1 FAIL > > 2 PASS > > 3 FAIL > > > > The way it is displayed with the current code from git is: > > > > A 0/3 > > 1 FAIL > > 2 FAIL > > 3 FAIL > > > > The way it is displayed with this patch is: > > > > A FAIL > > > > The current state of things is making it difficult to compare subtest > > results. Would anyone object to me reverting > > eeec306bc2197a2fc0eeb064462a1244d39c16fa while we sort out how to best > > handle subtests? > > Yeah, it should definitely be backed out. _______________________________________________ Piglit mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/piglit
