Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t v5 0/7] CRC testing with Chamelium improvements

2017-07-20 Thread Paul Kocialkowski
On Thu, 2017-07-20 at 14:41 +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 1:27 PM, Paul Kocialkowski > wrote: > > On Thu, 2017-07-20 at 12:39 +0300, Jani Nikula wrote: > > > For future reference, please post new versions of the entire > > > series as > >

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t v5 0/7] CRC testing with Chamelium improvements

2017-07-20 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 1:27 PM, Paul Kocialkowski wrote: > On Thu, 2017-07-20 at 12:39 +0300, Jani Nikula wrote: >> For future reference, please post new versions of the entire series as >> new threads. When posting new versions of just some individual >>

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t v5 0/7] CRC testing with Chamelium improvements

2017-07-20 Thread Paul Kocialkowski
On Thu, 2017-07-20 at 12:39 +0300, Jani Nikula wrote: > For future reference, please post new versions of the entire series as > new threads. When posting new versions of just some individual > patches, > in-reply-to each patch being replaced is fine. I think this is more > clear, and also gives

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t v5 0/7] CRC testing with Chamelium improvements

2017-07-20 Thread Martin Peres
On 20/07/17 12:39, Jani Nikula wrote: For future reference, please post new versions of the entire series as new threads. When posting new versions of just some individual patches, in-reply-to each patch being replaced is fine. I think this is more clear, and also gives patchwork a better

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t v5 0/7] CRC testing with Chamelium improvements

2017-07-20 Thread Jani Nikula
For future reference, please post new versions of the entire series as new threads. When posting new versions of just some individual patches, in-reply-to each patch being replaced is fine. I think this is more clear, and also gives patchwork a better chance to apply the right patches for testing

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t v5 0/7] CRC testing with Chamelium improvements

2017-07-19 Thread Lyude Paul
Thank you for all of the great work you're doing! This looks perfect, so for the whole series Reviewed-by: Lyude I've pushed everything upstream, congrats! On Wed, 2017-07-19 at 16:46 +0300, Paul Kocialkowski wrote: > Changes since v4: > * Moved igt_get_cairo_surface out of

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t v5 0/7] CRC testing with Chamelium improvements

2017-07-19 Thread Paul Kocialkowski
Changes since v4: * Moved igt_get_cairo_surface out of the thread function to properly handle assert failure * Rebased on top of current master Changes since v3: * Renamed structure used by async crc calculation for more clarity * Used const qualifier for untouched buffer when hashing * Split