Hi, On Thu, 3 Mar 2022 at 10:53, Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 03, 2022 at 10:05:07AM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote: > > Back at XDC we floated the idea of creating a test suite for IGT that we > > expect any KMS driver to pass, similar to what v4l2-compliance and > > cec-compliance provide for v4l2 and CEC respectively. > > > > I was looking at the list of tests, and it's fairly massive, so it's not > > clear to me what tests we could start this suite with. I can only assume > > all the KMS (but the chamelium ones) and fbdev related ones would be a > > good start? > > > > What do you think? > > I believe we should start with the group of the tests that we know that > are reliably passing today on most of the platforms and then increase > the list as the tests and drivers become more reliable. > > For instance, many of these would be candidate to be filtered out for now > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-next/index.html?testfilter=kms > > compared to the whole view of kms tests: > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-next/shards-all.html?testfilter=kms We are running some of IGT on Panfrost + amdgpu + i915 as part of KernelCI as well: go to https://linux.kernelci.org/test/ and search for 'igt-gpu'. This gets run for mainline, next, and whatever other kernel trees push into i915. There is a Grafana-based dashboard that the KernelCI team have been working on to visualise test runs, but it's currently having some backend issues so I can't show you a link for that. I did raise a suggestion in their design discussion for a proper testing dashboard for making it easier to see the status, so feel free to pile in there: https://github.com/kernelci/kernelci-project/discussions/28#discussioncomment-2293696 Cheers, Daniel
