On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 05:46:50PM +0300, Imre Deak wrote: > On ma, 2016-10-17 at 16:32 +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 03:39:04PM +0300, Imre Deak wrote: > > > Add gem_exec_suspend/basic-s3-devices and basic-s4-devices subtests > > > to > > > BAT. At the same time remove basic-s4 from the list, which is atm > > > implicitly disabled via HIBERNATION=n in kconfig. We would need at > > > least > > > basic S4 coverage provided by basic-s4-devices, which requires > > > HIBERNATION=y. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Imre Deak <imre.deak@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > What's the impact on BAT runtime with this? > > I measured 8 sec for S3-devices and 9 sec for S4-devices on my APL. > > > Afaik we're already over budget ... Where do you safe the time to > > afford this? > > I didn't, but we don't have any S4 coverage in CI atm and it's the > minimum that can be added. The S3-devices subtest is not critical, > although it would be useful for cases where we wouldn't get any logs > for the full S3 test. Yeah, I don't think a reduced S3 test in BAT is useful if we have the full one already. It's a good test for debugging, but not within the very tight constraints we have for BAT. Re S4: If it indeed improves coverage (i.e. calls our shutdown hooks and all these S4-only callbacks) then adding it to BAT sounds reasonable. Still there's the issue of where to get the machine time from. I really do think you need to first trade in some speed-up here (or throw out some other tests) before you can add more tests. And yes I know that's not fun, but until we have CI running a more complete test set (after BAT has done the initial sanity checking, to avoid wasting machine time on broken patches), that's the reality we have :( Cheers, Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
