On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 8:29 AM, Daniel Vetter <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 07:41:04PM -0700, Dylan Baker wrote: >> [snip] >> > > I'll throw a patch at the end of the series, do you want me to send >> >> I'm gonna take it back, sorry. I don't know that dmesg-warn should be >> worse than warn, (same for fail) since pass -> dmesg-warn, warn -> >> dmesg-fail, and fail -> dmesg-fail. Personally I was never a fan of having >> special dmesg- statuses, I feel that a fail is a fail and warn is a warn, but >> I'm not sure that change is correct. > > The current ordering seems wrong to me, e.g. if you have a failing tests > and fix up some dmesg noise you now have a regression.
And if you add dmesg noise, you have a fix :) printk(), here I come! On a mildly note, am I the only one who thinks it's weird that transitions to/from (skip, notrun) are considered fixes/regressions? -ilia _______________________________________________ Piglit mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/piglit
