Re: [Piglit] [PATCH] glsl-1.10: add a 'initialization-incompatible-type-propagation' test
On 9/17/18 1:01 PM, Timothy Arceri wrote:
On 17/9/18 7:56 pm, Danylo Piliaiev wrote:
On 9/17/18 12:28 PM, Timothy Arceri wrote:
On 16/8/18 12:23 am, Danylo Piliaiev wrote:
This tests the case when initialising with incompatible type
changed a type of the variable being initialized.
Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=107547
Signed-off-by: Danylo Piliaiev
---
I'm not sure if it's a proper way to test this. The compilation is
intended to
fail but the difference is in the error messages. The correct
message is an
error in initialization line and no errors in accessing to the
variables,
incorrect - additional errors where variables are accessed.
At the moment it tests only that compiler wouldn't crash which
happened
in the mentioned bug and fix proposed in
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/48256/
...ization-incompatible-type-propagation.frag | 27
+++
1 file changed, 27 insertions(+)
create mode 100644
tests/spec/glsl-1.10/compiler/initialization-incompatible-type-propagation.frag
diff --git
a/tests/spec/glsl-1.10/compiler/initialization-incompatible-type-propagation.frag
b/tests/spec/glsl-1.10/compiler/initialization-incompatible-type-propagation.frag
new file mode 100644
index 0..0a1873489
--- /dev/null
+++
b/tests/spec/glsl-1.10/compiler/initialization-incompatible-type-propagation.frag
@@ -0,0 +1,27 @@
+// [config]
+// expect_result: fail
+// glsl_version: 1.10
+// [end config]
+//
+// Initializing a variable using the variable with a wrong type
+// should not affect the type of the variable being initialized.
+// At least it should not crash, see bug:
+// https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=107547
+//
+// From section 5.8 of the GLSL 1.10 spec:
+// The assignment operator stores the value of expression into
lvalue.
+// It will compile only if expression and lvalue have the same
type.
+
+#version 110
+
+uniform struct {
+ float field;
+} data;
+
+int f() {
+ vec4 a = vec2(0.0);
+ a.w -= 1.0; > +
+ vec2 b = data;
+ b.x -= 1.0;
This looks like it should be split into two different tests. Is
there any reason you included both tests together?
The reason was is that the only thing that is tested here is that
Mesa doesn't crash when compiling the shader.
Testing whether the assignment of an incompatible type produces an
error is on the other tests.
I'm not sure at this moment if that was a good reason. I can split it
into two tests if you find it necessary.
Regardless of what you are testing you still have two tests here. If
they can both trigger a segfault in different paths they should be
spilt in two. If they both test the a segfault in the same place then
we should probably simplify the test.
Understood, I'll split it in to two tests. Only one case is causing
segfault, other one just has a potential.
+}
___
Piglit mailing list
Piglit@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/piglit
Re: [Piglit] [PATCH] glsl-1.10: add a 'initialization-incompatible-type-propagation' test
On 17/9/18 7:56 pm, Danylo Piliaiev wrote:
On 9/17/18 12:28 PM, Timothy Arceri wrote:
On 16/8/18 12:23 am, Danylo Piliaiev wrote:
This tests the case when initialising with incompatible type
changed a type of the variable being initialized.
Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=107547
Signed-off-by: Danylo Piliaiev
---
I'm not sure if it's a proper way to test this. The compilation is
intended to
fail but the difference is in the error messages. The correct message
is an
error in initialization line and no errors in accessing to the
variables,
incorrect - additional errors where variables are accessed.
At the moment it tests only that compiler wouldn't crash which happened
in the mentioned bug and fix proposed in
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/48256/
...ization-incompatible-type-propagation.frag | 27 +++
1 file changed, 27 insertions(+)
create mode 100644
tests/spec/glsl-1.10/compiler/initialization-incompatible-type-propagation.frag
diff --git
a/tests/spec/glsl-1.10/compiler/initialization-incompatible-type-propagation.frag
b/tests/spec/glsl-1.10/compiler/initialization-incompatible-type-propagation.frag
new file mode 100644
index 0..0a1873489
--- /dev/null
+++
b/tests/spec/glsl-1.10/compiler/initialization-incompatible-type-propagation.frag
@@ -0,0 +1,27 @@
+// [config]
+// expect_result: fail
+// glsl_version: 1.10
+// [end config]
+//
+// Initializing a variable using the variable with a wrong type
+// should not affect the type of the variable being initialized.
+// At least it should not crash, see bug:
+// https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=107547
+//
+// From section 5.8 of the GLSL 1.10 spec:
+// The assignment operator stores the value of expression into
lvalue.
+// It will compile only if expression and lvalue have the same
type.
+
+#version 110
+
+uniform struct {
+ float field;
+} data;
+
+int f() {
+ vec4 a = vec2(0.0);
+ a.w -= 1.0; > +
+ vec2 b = data;
+ b.x -= 1.0;
This looks like it should be split into two different tests. Is there
any reason you included both tests together?
The reason was is that the only thing that is tested here is that Mesa
doesn't crash when compiling the shader.
Testing whether the assignment of an incompatible type produces an error
is on the other tests.
I'm not sure at this moment if that was a good reason. I can split it
into two tests if you find it necessary.
Regardless of what you are testing you still have two tests here. If
they can both trigger a segfault in different paths they should be spilt
in two. If they both test the a segfault in the same place then we
should probably simplify the test.
+}
___
Piglit mailing list
Piglit@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/piglit
Re: [Piglit] [PATCH] glsl-1.10: add a 'initialization-incompatible-type-propagation' test
On 9/17/18 12:28 PM, Timothy Arceri wrote:
On 16/8/18 12:23 am, Danylo Piliaiev wrote:
This tests the case when initialising with incompatible type
changed a type of the variable being initialized.
Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=107547
Signed-off-by: Danylo Piliaiev
---
I'm not sure if it's a proper way to test this. The compilation is
intended to
fail but the difference is in the error messages. The correct message
is an
error in initialization line and no errors in accessing to the
variables,
incorrect - additional errors where variables are accessed.
At the moment it tests only that compiler wouldn't crash which happened
in the mentioned bug and fix proposed in
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/48256/
...ization-incompatible-type-propagation.frag | 27 +++
1 file changed, 27 insertions(+)
create mode 100644
tests/spec/glsl-1.10/compiler/initialization-incompatible-type-propagation.frag
diff --git
a/tests/spec/glsl-1.10/compiler/initialization-incompatible-type-propagation.frag
b/tests/spec/glsl-1.10/compiler/initialization-incompatible-type-propagation.frag
new file mode 100644
index 0..0a1873489
--- /dev/null
+++
b/tests/spec/glsl-1.10/compiler/initialization-incompatible-type-propagation.frag
@@ -0,0 +1,27 @@
+// [config]
+// expect_result: fail
+// glsl_version: 1.10
+// [end config]
+//
+// Initializing a variable using the variable with a wrong type
+// should not affect the type of the variable being initialized.
+// At least it should not crash, see bug:
+// https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=107547
+//
+// From section 5.8 of the GLSL 1.10 spec:
+// The assignment operator stores the value of expression into
lvalue.
+// It will compile only if expression and lvalue have the same
type.
+
+#version 110
+
+uniform struct {
+ float field;
+} data;
+
+int f() {
+ vec4 a = vec2(0.0);
+ a.w -= 1.0; > +
+ vec2 b = data;
+ b.x -= 1.0;
This looks like it should be split into two different tests. Is there
any reason you included both tests together?
The reason was is that the only thing that is tested here is that Mesa
doesn't crash when compiling the shader.
Testing whether the assignment of an incompatible type produces an error
is on the other tests.
I'm not sure at this moment if that was a good reason. I can split it
into two tests if you find it necessary.
+}
___
Piglit mailing list
Piglit@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/piglit
Re: [Piglit] [PATCH] glsl-1.10: add a 'initialization-incompatible-type-propagation' test
On 16/8/18 12:23 am, Danylo Piliaiev wrote:
This tests the case when initialising with incompatible type
changed a type of the variable being initialized.
Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=107547
Signed-off-by: Danylo Piliaiev
---
I'm not sure if it's a proper way to test this. The compilation is intended to
fail but the difference is in the error messages. The correct message is an
error in initialization line and no errors in accessing to the variables,
incorrect - additional errors where variables are accessed.
At the moment it tests only that compiler wouldn't crash which happened
in the mentioned bug and fix proposed in
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/48256/
...ization-incompatible-type-propagation.frag | 27 +++
1 file changed, 27 insertions(+)
create mode 100644
tests/spec/glsl-1.10/compiler/initialization-incompatible-type-propagation.frag
diff --git
a/tests/spec/glsl-1.10/compiler/initialization-incompatible-type-propagation.frag
b/tests/spec/glsl-1.10/compiler/initialization-incompatible-type-propagation.frag
new file mode 100644
index 0..0a1873489
--- /dev/null
+++
b/tests/spec/glsl-1.10/compiler/initialization-incompatible-type-propagation.frag
@@ -0,0 +1,27 @@
+// [config]
+// expect_result: fail
+// glsl_version: 1.10
+// [end config]
+//
+// Initializing a variable using the variable with a wrong type
+// should not affect the type of the variable being initialized.
+// At least it should not crash, see bug:
+// https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=107547
+//
+// From section 5.8 of the GLSL 1.10 spec:
+// The assignment operator stores the value of expression into lvalue.
+// It will compile only if expression and lvalue have the same type.
+
+#version 110
+
+uniform struct {
+float field;
+} data;
+
+int f() {
+vec4 a = vec2(0.0);
+a.w -= 1.0; > +
+vec2 b = data;
+b.x -= 1.0;
This looks like it should be split into two different tests. Is there
any reason you included both tests together?
+}
___
Piglit mailing list
Piglit@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/piglit
