On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 7:47 AM, Yang, Guang A guang.a.y...@intel.com wrote:
Ok there are a few cases where we can indeed make tests faster, but it will
be work for us. And that won't really speed up much since we're adding piles
more testcases at a pretty quick rate. And many of these new
I think stopping the tests after 10 minutes is ok, but in general the point of
stress tests is to beat on the kernel for corner cases. E.g.
even with todays extensive set of stress tests some spurious OOM bugs can
only be reproduced in 1 out of 5 runs. Reducing the test time could severely
On Tue, 15 Apr 2014 19:17:59 +0200
Daniel Vetter daniel.vet...@intel.com wrote:
Ok there are a few cases where we can indeed make tests faster, but it
will be work for us. And that won't really speed up much since we're
adding piles more testcases at a pretty quick rate. And many of these
new
On 16/04/2014 17:42, Jesse Barnes wrote:
On Tue, 15 Apr 2014 19:17:59 +0200
Daniel Vetter daniel.vet...@intel.com wrote:
Ok there are a few cases where we can indeed make tests faster, but it
will be work for us. And that won't really speed up much since we're
adding piles more testcases at a
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 08:42:27AM -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote:
And can you elaborate on the CRC tests? It doesn't seem like those
should take more than a few frames to verify we're getting what we
expect...
Indeed, if the CRC tests take a long time, that's a bug (for instance we
may never
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 05:50:20PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
On 16/04/2014 17:42, Jesse Barnes wrote:
On Tue, 15 Apr 2014 19:17:59 +0200
Daniel Vetter daniel.vet...@intel.com wrote:
Ok there are a few cases where we can indeed make tests faster, but it
will be work for us. And that
Hi all,
I have discussed with Daniel about the running time for each cases before and
we set the standard as 10M, if one can’t finish after running 10M we will see
it as Timeout and report bug on FDO(such as : Bug
77474https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=77474 -
Chated with Ben last week about this
It may be feasiable to have a fast.tests for intel-gpu-tools also
Thanks
--Shuang
From: Yang, Guang A
Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2014 11:46 PM
To: Vetter, Daniel; Barnes, Jesse; Widawsky, Benjamin; Wood, Thomas; Jin,
Gordon; OTC GFX QA Extended;
On 15/04/2014 17:46, Yang, Guang A wrote:
Hi all,
I have discussed with Daniel about the running time for each cases
before and we set the standard as 10M, if one can’t finish after
running 10M we will see it as Timeout and report bug on FDO(such as :
Bug 77474
From: Vetter, Daniel
Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2014 1:18 AM
To: Yang, Guang A; Barnes, Jesse; Widawsky, Benjamin; Wood, Thomas; Jin,
Gordon; OTC GFX QA Extended; intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Parenteau, Paul
A; Nikkanen, Kimmo
Subject: Re: The whole round of i-g-t testing cost too long
Ok there are a few cases where we can indeed make tests faster, but it will be
work for us. And that won't really speed up much since we're adding piles more
testcases at a pretty quick rate. And many of these new testcases are CRC
based, so inheritely take some time to run.
[He, Shuang] OK, so
11 matches
Mail list logo
