On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 02:33:23PM -0700, Vinay Belgaumkar wrote:
> Added the missing IGT_TEST_DESCRIPTION and some subtest
> descriptions. Trying to establish a method to document
> subtests, it should describe the feature being tested
> rather than how. The HOW part can, if needed, be
> described in the test code.
>
> Documenting subtests will give us a good way to trace
> feature test coverage, and also help a faster ramp
> for understanding the test code.
>
> v2: Removed duplication, addressed comments, cc'd test author
>
> Cc: Michał Winiarski <michal.winiarski@xxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Eric Anholt <eric@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Signed-off-by: Vinay Belgaumkar <vinay.belgaumkar@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> tests/gem_flink_basic.c | 36 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
> 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tests/gem_flink_basic.c b/tests/gem_flink_basic.c
> index 26ae7d6..9c8c4c3 100644
> --- a/tests/gem_flink_basic.c
> +++ b/tests/gem_flink_basic.c
> @@ -36,6 +36,8 @@
> #include <sys/ioctl.h>
> #include "drm.h"
>
> +IGT_TEST_DESCRIPTION("Tests for flink - a way to export a gem object by name");
> +
> static void
> test_flink(int fd)
> {
> @@ -44,8 +46,6 @@ test_flink(int fd)
> struct drm_gem_open open_struct;
> int ret;
>
> - igt_info("Testing flink and open.\n");
Do we really want to remove runtime-dumped information (maybe we could
tune it down to debug level) with comments that in my experience, no one
ever reads?
I just looked again at the igt library docs, and like last year when I've
done that, we've accumulated sizeable chunks of missing docs and warnings.
So who's going to maintain this? We can barely keep docs in shape for the
core libs, how exactly are we going to keep docs in shape for the hundreds
of testcases we have? Do you have a team of 10+ people working on this?
Same about IGT_TEST_DESCRIPTION, not enough people seem to care even for
that simple one-liner to make it work.
My proposal would be that we first try to get the docs we have into decent
shape, which means establishing as something everyone takes care of.
Adding more lofty documentation goals that won't pan out imo just doesn't
make much sense.
And yes this is from the person who did push for docs almost everywhere.
It's hard work, and it's a lot of hard work.
-Daniel
> -
> memset(&create, 0, sizeof(create));
> create.size = 16 * 1024;
> ret = ioctl(fd, DRM_IOCTL_I915_GEM_CREATE, &create);
> @@ -69,8 +69,6 @@ test_double_flink(int fd)
> struct drm_gem_flink flink2;
> int ret;
>
> - igt_info("Testing repeated flink.\n");
> -
> memset(&create, 0, sizeof(create));
> create.size = 16 * 1024;
> ret = ioctl(fd, DRM_IOCTL_I915_GEM_CREATE, &create);
> @@ -92,8 +90,6 @@ test_bad_flink(int fd)
> struct drm_gem_flink flink;
> int ret;
>
> - igt_info("Testing error return on bad flink ioctl.\n");
> -
> flink.handle = 0x10101010;
> ret = ioctl(fd, DRM_IOCTL_GEM_FLINK, &flink);
> igt_assert(ret == -1 && errno == ENOENT);
> @@ -105,8 +101,6 @@ test_bad_open(int fd)
> struct drm_gem_open open_struct;
> int ret;
>
> - igt_info("Testing error return on bad open ioctl.\n");
> -
> open_struct.name = 0x10101010;
> ret = ioctl(fd, DRM_IOCTL_GEM_OPEN, &open_struct);
>
> @@ -121,8 +115,6 @@ test_flink_lifetime(int fd)
> struct drm_gem_open open_struct;
> int ret, fd2;
>
> - igt_info("Testing flink lifetime.\n");
> -
> fd2 = drm_open_driver(DRIVER_INTEL);
>
> memset(&create, 0, sizeof(create));
> @@ -134,11 +126,13 @@ test_flink_lifetime(int fd)
> ret = ioctl(fd2, DRM_IOCTL_GEM_FLINK, &flink);
> igt_assert_eq(ret, 0);
>
> + /* Open another reference to the gem object */
> open_struct.name = flink.name;
> ret = ioctl(fd, DRM_IOCTL_GEM_OPEN, &open_struct);
> igt_assert_eq(ret, 0);
> igt_assert(open_struct.handle != 0);
>
> + /* Before closing the previous one */
> close(fd2);
> fd2 = drm_open_driver(DRIVER_INTEL);
>
> @@ -155,14 +149,36 @@ igt_main
> igt_fixture
> fd = drm_open_driver(DRIVER_INTEL);
>
> + /**
> + * basic:
> + * Test creation and use of flink.
> + */
> igt_subtest("basic")
> test_flink(fd);
> +
> + /**
> + * double-flink:
> + * This test validates the ability to create multiple flinks
> + * for the same gem object. They should obtain the same name.
> + */
> igt_subtest("double-flink")
> test_double_flink(fd);
> +
> + /**
> + * bad-flink:
> + * Negative test for invalid flink usage.
> + */
> igt_subtest("bad-flink")
> test_bad_flink(fd);
> +
> igt_subtest("bad-open")
> test_bad_open(fd);
> +
> + /**
> + * flink-lifetime:
> + * Flink lifetime is limited to that of the gem object it
> + * points to.
> + */
> igt_subtest("flink-lifetime")
> test_flink_lifetime(fd);
> }
> --
> 1.9.1
>
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
--
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
