On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 06:19:24PM -0400, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> This is useful when 1 person is running all tests and other one is reading log willing
> to know what tests passed and which failed. So tester is able to run all tests without
> stop and send log to developer.
>
> v2: Rebased after igt_debug_warn_and_wait_for_key
>
> Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c | 20 +++++++++++++++-----
> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c b/tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c
> index 24f5ca8..ce50cdd 100644
> --- a/tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c
> +++ b/tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c
> @@ -316,11 +316,21 @@ static bool is_green(char *crc)
>
> static void assert_or_manual(bool condition, const char *expected)
> {
> - if (igt_interactive_debug)
> - igt_info("Is %s?\n", expected);
> - else
> - igt_debug("%s\n", expected);
> - igt_debug_wait_for_keypress("manual");
> + char msg[50];
> + char c;
> +
> + igt_debug("%s\n", expected);
> +
> + sprintf(msg, "Is %s [Y/n]? ", expected);
> + c = igt_debug_warn_and_wait_for_key("manual", msg);
> +
> + if (c) {
> + if (c == 'n' || c == 'N')
> + igt_fail(-1);
> + else
> + igt_info("\n");
> + }
Imo it'd be better to move this check into the helper too. And then give
it a name that makes it clear that it's a checkpoint for the user for
manual testing. I don't have any good ideas, but maybe
igt_interactive_debug_manual_check?
And imo you can fold this one in with the previous patch - easier to
understand if you add the user together with the function.
And one more aside: Should we document the different interactive debug
thigns somewhere?
-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
