On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 10:55:48AM +0000, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote: > > On 02/24/2015 09:51 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: > >On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 03:57:55PM +0000, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote: > >>From: Damien Lespiau <damien.lespiau@xxxxxxxxx> > >> > >>Signed-off-by: Damien Lespiau <damien.lespiau@xxxxxxxxx> > > > >testdisplay is a bit an awkward test, mostly used by QA for manual > >testing. I think we also need some basic kms_setmode subtest to use the > >new tiling modes on skl in one of the automated testcases. Otherwise I > >fear this will bitrot fast. > > Will have a look at kms_setmode. > > Otherwise I like testdisplay, used it a lot for testing. :) Yeah like I've said it's useful for manual testing, but we very much want automated testcoverage too. We try to keep these two use-cases in the same binary (using --debug flags or --interactive mode and similar shared things). But since testdisplay is QA's beast we can't massively refactor that testcase since no developer has the QA setup at hand to make sure nothing breaks :( -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
