On Wednesday, September 24, 2014 09:47:37 AM Ian Romanick wrote: > So, here it is. Finally. > > The first two patches provide the infrastructure for generating > randomized UBO tests. I think these are pretty solid, but there are > probably ways to impove the Python, etc. > > The remaining three patches are examples of ways the infrastructure can > be used. Here is where I am not sure what we should do. I know that we > don't want to make the "forever" test in patch 4 part of regular piglit > runs. However, it has found a LOT of bugs in EVERY OpenGL driver that I > have tested. > > I'm also unsure about the random tests generated by patch 3. Do we want > actual random tests in regular piglit runs? What do we do for tests for > GLSL 1.40? Generate the "same" tests, but use #version 140 instead of > #extension?
I was thinking that we could add a ubo fuzzer profile with random tests, as long as the fuzzer does complete (and preferably if there is a way to limit how long it runs), it could be useful. > > In any case, I know that folks are hard at work on fp64 support, so > using the various random runners here should help that effort. Sorry > for all the delays. > > One last thing... I'm presenting a bunch of information about this work > at XDC in a couple weeks. Maybe we want to wait to hammer out the more > difficult details until then. Dunno. > > _______________________________________________ > Piglit mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/piglit
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Piglit mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/piglit
