Quoting Petri Latvala (2020-08-10 09:22:42) > On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 10:09:46AM +0200, Zbigniew Kempczyński wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 06, 2020 at 03:45:29PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > > Unknown, so future, gen are marked as -1 which we want to treat as -1u > > > so that always pass >= gen checks. > > > > Do we really want to enable the tests when platform is not fully > > enabled in IGT? > > What does "fully enabled" mean? > > If the test is checking for just "gen > x", the test should work > already. If the test is also checking for "gen < y" then we get a > spurious failure, but either way CI is going to tell you that > something is not passing. Without this it will be a skip, along with > skipping in the case that should just work already without actual test > changes. And for a very large fraction of tests, the behaviour of next gen follows current gen. Those that do not are very interesting, and will be a much smaller number than the volume of skips we have to process. -Chris _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
